In re C.S.

• Decision Date: 20 July 2022
• Docket Number: 22-0607
• Parties: IN THE INTEREST OF C.S., Minor Child J.S., Intervenor, Appellant.
• Court: Iowa Court of Appeals

IN THE INTEREST OF C.S., Minor Child J.S., Intervenor, Appellant.

No. 22-0607

Court of Appeals of Iowa

July 20, 2022

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Cynthia S. Finley, District Associate Judge.

The maternal grandfather appeals the district court decision denying his petition to remove the Iowa Department of Human Services as the child's guardian.

Alexander S. Momany of Howes Law Firm, P.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellant.

Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, and Ellen Ramsey-Kacena, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee State.

Julie Gunderson Trachta, Cedar Rapids, attorney and guardian ad litem for minor child.

Considered by Bower, C.J., and Schumacher and Ahlers, JJ.

1

SCHUMACHER, JUDGE

The maternal grandfather, J.S., appeals the juvenile court decision denying his petition to remove the Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) as the legal guardian of C.S. following the termination of the parental rights of the child's parents. DHS did not act unreasonably or irresponsibly, and the maternal grandfather has not shown DHS failed to act in the child's best interests by placing the child with the maternal grandmother. We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.

I. Background Facts &Proceedings

B.S. is the mother of C.S., who was born in 2017. On December 18, 2019, the child was adjudicated to be in need of assistance (CINA) due to the mother's use of methamphetamine. The CINA adjudication order noted the child had been voluntarily placed with J.S., the maternal grandfather.^[1] The disposition order formally placed custody of the child with DHS for the purpose of relative care. The child continued in the grandfather's care throughout the CINA proceedings.

B.S.'s parents are divorced. The maternal grandmother is remarried and lives in Texas. After the child's birth, the mother and the child resided with the maternal grandmother. The maternal grandmother also provided care for the child while the mother was at work prior to the mother and child's move to Iowa. The grandmother maintained contact with the child while the child was living with the grandfather. In addition, the child spent two vacations-one for ten days and one for three weeks-with the grandmother in Texas.

2

The mother's parental rights were terminated on January 25, 2021.^[2] The termination order provided DHS was the custodian of the child and was appointed guardian of the child. The grandfather and grandmother both stated they would like to be considered as a placement option for the child. The grandfather took classes to become a licensed foster parent. Each grandparent participated in an adoptive home study.

A DHS report dated May 14 stated the grandfather was able to provide for the child's needs but also stated:

I do have concerns about [the grandfather's] past history with [the mother], and the inappropriate arguing and name calling they've both done with each other in front of [the child] in the past. I also have concerns about the ongoing face-to-face contact [the grandfather] is currently allowing [the mother] to have with [the child], without the prior knowledge of this worker

The report noted, "[The grandfather] feels that it's okay for [the mother] to have nightly FaceTime calls with [the child] and spend face-to-face time with [the child] as long as [the grandfather] is around also, so [the grandfather], [the mother] and [the child] would all spend time together." The grandfather and the mother were considered to have "a very dysfunctional father-daughter relationship." The report also noted the...