Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 6-994 / 06-1832 Filed December 28, 2006

IN THE INTEREST OF S.K., Minor Child, S.R.K., Mother, Appellant. ________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Muscatine County, Gary P. Strausser, District Associate Judge.

A mother appeals from a juvenile court order that adjudicated her daughter as a child in need of assistance. AFFIRMED.

Mark Neary, Muscatine, for appellant mother. Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Bruce Kempkes, Assistant Attorney General, Gary Allison, County Attorney, and Korie Shippee, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee State. Cheryl Newport, Davenport, for minor child.

Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Zimmer and Eisenhauer, JJ.

2 ZIMMER, J. A mother appeals from a juvenile court order that adjudicated her daughter as a child in need of assistance (CINA) under Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(c)(2) and 232.2(6)(n) (2005). She contends the evidence does not

support the juvenile court's decision. We affirm. I. Background Facts and Proceedings

Sarah is the mother of Shyanne, born in September 2005. Sarah was seventeen when she gave birth to her daughter. Sarah either does not know who fathered her child or she refuses to disclose the father's identity. She

identified three men as the possible father of Shyanne but claims not to know any of their last names. In late May 2006 the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) received a report that Sarah and her current boyfriend, Roger, were living in a car with Shyanne and several dogs. DHS also received information that Sarah and

Roger were spending time in a filthy apartment and smoking marijuana in Shyanne's presence. After an investigation, DHS issued a child abuse report finding Sarah had denied Shyanne critical care. Sarah agreed to a plan which called for her

parents to supervise all contact between Sarah and her daughter, and DHS contracted with Family Resources to begin providing services. Sarah submitted to urinalysis, and the results of the drug test were negative. Roger refused to submit to a drug test. Sarah's relationship with Roger is problematic. Roger has an extensive criminal history, including numerous convictions for assault. There was an

3 incident of domestic violence between Sarah and Roger in April 2006, which Sarah later denied. Roger has left threatening messages with DHS, and he has personally threatened DHS workers. Sarah told DHS workers she was not

seeing Roger, but the record reveals Sarah visited Roger twice when he was in jail. At a family meeting, Sarah again denied she had any contact with Roger, but a DHS worker saw her leaving the meeting in a car with Roger. Soon after services commenced, Sarah's DHS caseworker expressed concerns regarding Sarah's instability, her irrational thought patterns, and her dishonesty about "nearly everything." The caseworker described Sarah's A DHS worker also

behavior as "generally non-cooperative and belligerent."

observed Sarah screaming at her parents and using profanities in Shyanne's presence. Sarah has threatened DHS workers with physical harm, telling one caseworker she would "find [her] in an alley." The State filed a CINA petition on July 26, 2006. Sarah received a mental health evaluation the following month. The psychologist reported Sarah was

uncooperative, had grandiose ideas, and expressed irrational thought patterns. He recommended Sarah undergo therapy and medication management, but she declined and left the office. After the evaluation, Sarah told her caseworker the psychologist was "a quack, and she [Sarah] knows more than he does about psychology." Following a contested adjudicatory hearing held September 18, 2006, the juvenile court adjudicated Shyanne CINA pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(c)(2) and 232.2(6)(n) (child is likely to suffer harm due to parent's failure to exercise care in supervising child; parent's mental condition results in child not

4 receiving adequate care). 1 The court found the evidence overwhelming that

Sarah is mentally unstable, and it concluded Shyanne would suffer harm if she remained in Sarah's care. The court ordered Shyanne to be placed in the

custody of Sarah's parents subject to DHS supervision. In an order entered October 26, 2006, the court denied the mother's motion to set aside its adjudicatory order. Sarah has appealed. II. Scope and Standards of Review

We review CINA cases de novo. Iowa R. App. P. 6.4; In re D.D., 653 N.W.2d 359, 361 (Iowa 2002). The State bears the burden of proving the

allegations by clear and convincing evidence. Iowa Code

Download IN THE INTEREST OF S.K., Minor Child, S.R.K., Mother, Appellant..pdf

Iowa Law