In the Interest of E.W. et al
| Decision Date | 24 January 2001 |
| Docket Number | 00-0434 |
| Parties | NOTICE! No decision has been made on publication of this opinion. The opinion is subject to modification or correction by the court and is not final until the time for rehearing or further review has passed. An unpublished opinion of the court of appeals MAY NOT BE CITED by a court or by a party in any other action. The official published opinions of the Iowa Court of Appeals are those published in the North Western Reporter published by West Group. IN THE INTEREST OF E.W., D.W., and T.S., Minor Children, M.M., Mother, Appellant./ 00-0434 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA Filed |
| Court | Iowa Court of Appeals |
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Scott County, John G. Mullen, District Associate Judge.
Sharon Sinnard, Davenport, for appellant.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Tabitha Gardner, Assistant Attorney General, and Gerda C. Lane, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Patricia K. Wilger, Rock Island, Illinois, guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by Huitink, P.J., and Mahan and Vaitheswaran, JJ.
A mother appeals the decision of the juvenile court after a review hearing in a children in need of assistance (CINA) proceeding, which placed one child, Evan, in a residential treatment program. She claims Evan should be returned to her care. She asks to have the children's CINA adjudications dismissed. We affirm.
Michelle is the mother of Derek, born in December 1991; Evan, born in October 1992; and Tianna, born in August 1997. The family first came to the attention of the Department of Human Services (DHS) in December 1992. DHS issued a founded report of denial of critical care because Michelle had left the children in her apartment unattended while she went to a neighbor's to use a telephone. In March 1996, DHS issued a founded report of denial of critical care because Derek and Evan, then ages four and three respectively, had wandered away from home on several occasions.
Evan has been diagnosed with severe attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and oppositional defiant disorder. He was placed on medication for his condition. Michelle was inconsistent in giving Evan his medication. In July 1998, Evan began to attend a day treatment program. The family received in-home services from August 1998 to January 1999. Michelle refused to continue with services, stating she was not interested in learning parenting skills.
Michelle did not send Evan to the day treatment program for several days in February 1999. Evan's behavior became much worse; he appeared dazed and confused. Michelle requested assistance for Evan, but then refused to take him to two scheduled visits with his psychiatrist. Evan was removed from his mother's care and temporarily hospitalized. DHS issued another founded report of denial of critical care due to Michelle's failure to provide medical care for Evan. When Evan was released from the hospital he was placed in foster care.
After Evan was removed from the home, Michelle participated in supervised visitation. She agreed to resume participating in parenting skills sessions. She refused to inform social workers where she was working or the name of the day care provider for Derek and Tianna. Both Derek and Tianna exhibited some aggressive behavior. On May 27, 1999, the juvenile court adjudicated Evan a CINA under Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(b), (c)(2), (e), (f), (g) and (n). Derek and Tianna were adjudicated CINA under sections 232.2(6)(b) and (c)(2). Michelle did not attend the CINA hearing.
In June 1999, during a visit at her home, Michelle asked to hug Evan before he left. She then grabbed him, took him inside the house and locked the door. She told a social worker, "You will not take Evan from my home again, no matter what!" Michelle was very angry and refused to let Evan leave. Eventually, Evan let himself out of the house and he was returned to foster care. This episode was very traumatic for all three children. Visits were suspended for a short period of time.
Michelle obtained a psychological evaluation in July 1999. She was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with depressed mood and generalized anxiety disorder. The report recommended Michelle participate in individual therapy. On July 9, 1999, the juvenile court entered a disposition order. Evan remained in foster care and Derek and Tianna remained in the care of their mother. Michelle moved from Scott County to Henry County because she expected Evan would be placed there. That did not work out and Evan remained in Scott County.
In December 1999, Michelle moved to Des Moines County. She did not participate in services. She refused to tell social workers the name of the school Derek and Tianna attended. DHS was forced to obtain a court order to get medical treatment for Evan because Michelle refused to approve a change in his medication. Evan's behavior became worse and in January 2000 he was placed in a residential treatment program.
A review hearing was held on February 10, 2000. The court ordered Evan to remain in residential treatment, and Derek and Tianna would remain with their mother. Michelle appealed.
Our review of an action arising from CINA proceedings is de novo. In re B.B., 598 N.W.2d 312, 315 (Iowa App. 1999). We give weight to the fact findings of the juvenile court, especially when considering the credibility of witnesses, but we are not bound by these findings. In re D.S., 563 N.W.2d 12, 14 (Iowa App. 1997). Our primary concern is the best interests of the children. In re T.B., 604 N.W.2d 660, 662 (Iowa 2000).
...
To continue reading
Request your trial