IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA

No. 15-1864

Filed February 10, 2016

IN THE INTEREST OF H.W. and T.W.,

Minor Children,

T.W., Father,

Appellant.

________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Polk County, Colin J. Witt, District 

Associate Judge.

A father appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights. 

AFFIRMED. 

Colin R. McCormack of Van Cleaf & McCormack Law Firm, L.L.P., Des 

Moines, for appellant father.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Kathrine S. Miller-Todd, Assistant 

Attorney General, for appellee State.

Michelle R. Becker of the Youth Law Center, Des Moines, attorney and 

guardian ad litem for minor children.

Considered by Vaitheswaran, P.J., and Doyle and Mullins, JJ.
2

MULLINS, Judge.

A father appeals the juvenile court’s order terminating his parental rights to 

his two children: H.W., born in February 2008, and T.W., born in November 

2005.

1

 The father argues termination is not in the children’s best interests 

because he shares a substantial bond with his children. Upon our de novo 

review of the record, we affirm. 

In January 2013, the children were removed from their father’s care and 

custody due to the father’s methamphetamine use.

2

 In February 2013, the 

juvenile court adjudicated H.W. and T.W. as children in need of assistance 

(CINA). 

The father has been in and out of prison throughout the life of this case. 

After the children were removed from his home in early 2013, the father was 

arrested for possession of methamphetamine. He completed substance abuse 

treatment for marijuana, methamphetamine, and alcohol. Not long after he was 

released from the treatment program, the father was again arrested. He pleaded 

guilty in November 2013 and was sentenced to serve seven years in prison. In 

November 2014, the father was released from prison and began cooperating with 

services for this case. 

At the April 2015 permanency-review hearing, the father told the court that 

he was doing well but neglected to report he had an outstanding bench warrant 

 

1 The juvenile court also terminated the mother’s parental rights pursuant to Iowa Code 

section 232.116(1)(f) (2015). She does not appeal. 

2 The children were placed in the care of their mother until May 2014. The children were 

then removed from their mother’s care and custody and placed in the care of their 

paternal aunt until July 2015. At the time of the termination hearing, the mother was 

incarcerated, and the children were in the care of their maternal great aunt and uncle. 
3

for his arrest. Based on the father’s self-report of his progress and evidence 

presented by the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) that the father was 

engaging in services and community resources, the juvenile court concluded the 

children should be returned to the father’s care and custody the following 

month—exactly one year after the children had been removed from the mother’s 

care and custody. A few weeks later, however, the father was arrested for a 

violation of parole, operating while intoxicated third offense, and driving while 

barred-habitual offender. In July 2015, the father was sentenced to serve five 

years in prison. He has a tentative release date of July 2017. 

In September 2015, the State filed a termination-of-parental-rights petition. 

In October 2015, the juvenile court held a hearing on the petition and 

subsequently terminated the father’s parental rights to his two children pursuant 

to Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f).3 

We review termination-of-parental-rights proceedings de novo. In re A.M., 

843 N.W.2d 100, 110 (Iowa 2014). We give weight to the factual determinations 

of the juvenile court, especially with regard to witness credibility, but we are not 

bound by them. In re A.B., 815 N.W.2d 764, 773 (Iowa 2012). Our primary 

consideration is the best interests of the children. See id. at 776. 

On appeal, the father does not challenge the statutory grounds for 

termination, and we do not address the issue any further. See In re P.L., 778 

 

3 Under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(f), the court may terminate parental rights if the 

court finds the State has proved by clear and convincing evidence the child (1) is four 

years old or older; (2) has been adjudicated CINA; (3) has been removed from the 

parent’s physical custody “for at least twelve of the last eighteen months, or for the last 

twelve consecutive months and any trial period at home has been less than thirty days”; 

and (4) cannot be returned to the parent’s custody at the time of the termination hearing.
4

N.W.2d 33, 40 (Iowa 2010). Instead, the father claims termination of his parental 

rights was not in the children’s best interests under Iowa Code section 

232.116(3)(c)4because he shares a substantial bond with his children. 

Under Iowa law, a court need not terminate parental rights if it finds any of 

the statutory exceptions under section 232.116(3) apply. In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 

at 39. “‘The factors weighing against termination in section 232.116(3) are 

permissive, not mandatory,’ and the court may use its discretion, ‘based on the 

unique circumstances of each case and the best interests of the child, whether to 

apply the factors in this section to save the parent-child relationship.’” In re A.M., 

843 N.W.2d at 113 (quoting In re D.S., 806 N.W.2d 458, 475 (Iowa Ct. App. 

2011)). 

We do not find that the bond between the father and his children weighs 

against termination of the father’s parental rights here. Our review of the record 

before us reveals the children want contact with their father and worry about his 

safety. However, they are also afraid of him and concerned about returning to 

his care to only later be removed again. The father has a lengthy history of 

substance abuse and criminal activity. The children are doing well in their great 

aunt and uncle’s home, and the aunt and uncle wish to adopt them. Both 

children have stated they enjoy living with their aunt and uncle. Termination and 

adoption will provide these two young children with the permanency and stability 

they deserve. We cannot ask these children to continuously wait for their father 

to become a stable parent. In re D.W., 791 N.W.2d 703, 707 (Iowa 2010); see

 

4

Iowa Code section 232.116(3)(c) provides the court need not terminate parental rights 

if it determines that “termination would be detrimental to the child at the time due to the 

closeness of the parent-child relationship.” 
5

also In re A.B., 815 N.W.2d at 777 (“It is well-settled law that we cannot deprive a 

child of permanency after the State has proved a ground for termination under 

section 232.116(1) by hoping someday a parent will learn to be a parent and be 

able to provide a stable home for the child.” (quoting In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d at 

41)). “[A]t some point, the rights and needs of the children rise above the rights 

and needs of the parent.” In re C.S., 776 N.W.2d 297, 300 (Iowa Ct. App. 2009). 

Thus, upon our de novo review, we conclude no permissible factors 

weighing against termination exist and termination of the father’s parental rights 

is in the children’s best interests. We affirm the juvenile court’s order. 

AFFIRMED.