No. 4-860 / 04-1687Court of Appeals of Iowa.
Filed January 13, 2005
Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Black Hawk County, Alan Allbee, Associate Juvenile Judge.
Parents appeal a juvenile court order determining their children were in need of assistance. AFFIRMED.
Laura Langenwalter of Langenwalter Law Firm, Waterloo, for appellant father.
Michael Lanigan, Waterloo, for appellant mother.
Thomas J. Miller, Attorney General, Bruce Kempkes, Assistant Attorney General, Thomas J. Ferguson, County Attorney, and Steven Halbach, Assistant County Attorney, for appellee-State.
Sharon Briner, Assistant Public Defender, Waterloo, guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by Sackett, C.J., and Mahan and Hecht, JJ.
MAHAN, J.
I. Background Facts Proceedings
Rasim and Dzemila are the parents of Almaida, born in 1989, and Fazila, born in 1999. The children were removed from the parents’ care in March 2004 due to concerns of physical abuse. Almaida reported she had been beaten with a belt by her father. Fazila had bruises on her body and initially indicated she had been beaten by her mother, but later gave inconsistent statements. The children were placed in foster care. The parents refused to voluntarily participate in services.
The children were adjudicated to be children in need of assistance (CINA), pursuant to Iowa Code sections 232.2(6)(b) (2003) (parent has physically abused child) and (n) (parent’s mental condition results in child not receiving adequate care). The juvenile court found the evidence established both children had been physically abused. The court also had “severe reservations about the mother’s ability to protect either of these children from future physical abuse at the hands of the father, notwithstanding the mother’s attempts to secure a shift change in her employment.”
The disposition order, entered in October 2004, determined the father had anger management problems. The juvenile court also noted that the parents believed in corporal punishment of the children, which amounted to physical abuse. The parents were ordered to participate in family therapy and parent skill development services. The father was also to participate in individual counseling. The parents appealed the CINA orders.
II. Standard of Review
Our scope of review in juvenile court proceedings is de novo In re K.N., 625 N.W.2d 731, 733 (Iowa 2001). We review both the facts and the law, and adjudicate rights anew. Id. Although we give weight to the juvenile court’s factual findings, we are not bound by them. Id. Our primary concern is the best interests of the children. In re E.H., 578 N.W.2d 243, 248 (Iowa 1998).
III. Reasonable Efforts
The father claims the Department of Human Services failed to “make every reasonable effort to return to the child to the child’s home as quickly as possible consistent with the best interests of the child.” See Iowa Code § 232.102(7). He does not state what different or additional services could be offered to the family to assist in reunification. While the State has the obligation to provide reasonable reunification services, parents have the obligation to demand other, different, or additional services prior to the termination hearing. In re S.R., 600 N.W.2d 63, 65 (Iowa Ct.App. 1999). We find the services offered in this case are reasonable.
IV. Sufficiency of the Evidence
Both parents claim the evidence did not support removal of the children from their home. They assert there is insufficient evidence the children were physically abused. They contend that corporal punishment does not necessarily constitute physical abuse.
On our de novo review, we determine the evidence justifies removing the children from the home and adjudicating them CINA. Almaida clearly stated she had been beaten by her father with a belt. She did not feel safe attending semi-supervised visitation because she feared her father would punish her. It is also clear that Fazila had numerous bruises on her body. Although the perpetrator of the abuse remained unknown, her parents at best failed to adequately supervise her by permitting her to suffer such injuries while in their care. We also note the parents refused to voluntarily participate in services.
We affirm the decision of the juvenile court.
AFFIRMED.