Taken away
Uncovering facts behind one of Iowa’s darkest secrets
By Herb Strentz
Repeat after me: “Iowa is a great place to raise a family.”
Those words echo through generations of Iowa parents and grandparents. Take us for example. “Iowa is a great place to raise a family” was reassuring when we moved here with our daughters, then ages 2 and 4.
No regrets.
Decades later, however, you look at opinions issued by the Iowa Court of Appeals and you wonder about the Iowa “family” mantra; you wonder whether Iowans might be too self-satisfied, almost smug, when we could be working to preserve, if not extend, that treasure for others.
Why? Because a dozen or so times a month, the court rules on cases labeled along the lines of “IN THE INTEREST OF J.B., Minor Child”— appeals that often deal with termination of parental rights.
Yet these termination cases are not routinely reported by Iowa news media. That’s quite an anomaly, considering that if government puts you in the county jail for 30 days or fines you for shoplifting, you’re likely to see your name in the news. But not if government takes away your children.
Perhaps termination of parental rights doesn’t get much news coverage because cases are scattered across district courts in 99 counties, because of concern for the privacy of the children, because the issues can be so complex or because some identifying information is confidential.
So, consider this article a bit of a potpourri of information Iowans should know about child abuse and termination of parental rights.
Such termination is neither rare nor isolated. Hundreds of Iowa children are taken away from parents every year.
Data keepers at the Iowa Supreme Court report that 1,230 filings for termination of parental rights were made in 2009 under Chapter 232 of the Code of Iowa. Nailing down how many families and children are represented in those filings is difficult because county attorneys handle cases differently — multiple filings may be made in one family’s case if more than one child or more than one or two parents are involved. Nevertheless, the 1,230 filings suggest that, at the very least, two or maybe three times every working day a District Court in Iowa takes about the most severe government action it can against a person — taking away one’s children.
For the children involved, Iowa isn’t such a “great place.”
You glean at least that much from opinions issued by the Iowa Court of Appeals, which in 2009 heard 191 appeals on termination of parental rights. Maybe eight to 10 or so of those appeals result in the court’s reversing a termination order because, in the eyes of appellate judges, taking away the children isn’t justified, at least for now — but the Department of Human Services (DHS) usually continues its work with the family and may ask a county attorney to refile if circumstances warrant.
Most of the time, however, termination seems a “no-brainer.” (Some of those appeals appear to be groundless, but it takes less time to decide an appeal on its merits than to go through the process of dismissing it as “frivolous.”)
Consider these lines from one opinion denying an appeal of a termination order:
“The mother continues to reside with men who physically abuse her. There are confirmed reports of child abuse, as the child is involved in these matters. The mother also has not had stable housing.”
More and worse nightmare scenarios abound in the court opinions, symptoms of community needs as well as those of the children.
“These kids have no natural constituency,” says Chief Justice Marsha Ternus of the Iowa Supreme Court. “Yet, we all benefit from meeting their needs… as quickly as possible.”
Talking with Ternus and other people involved, exchanging e-mails and reviewing statistics on child abuse in Iowa all help provide some context for Iowa’s 1,230 filings for termination in 2009 and some insights to what’s going on.
• Forget the thought, “Sure, any instance of child abuse is awful. But Iowa still is much better than other states.” (A check with data keepers at the Minnesota Supreme Court indicated that although Minnesota has two million more people than Iowa, it had far fewer cases on termination of parental rights in 2009.) One study in the early 2000s showed Iowa above the national average in per capita reports of child abuse. Maybe that’s because we have a better reporting system, or because people expect something to be done when abuse is reported.
Figures from the Iowa Department of Human Services suggest about 12,400 children were abused in Iowa in 2009; about half of those were 5 or younger and half ages 6 to 17. (A federal study points out that abuse of younger children may be greater than reported because such children are not yet in school systems and other circumstances where outsiders, such as school teachers, are required by law to report signs of abuse.) In about 17,000 other Iowa cases, abuse was reported, but DHS assessment workers had no finding of abuse. The bottom-line figure works out to about 20 children per 1,000 being victims of abuse in 2009.
• An analysis by Prevent Child Abuse Iowa (PCAI) — a private organization — found the five Iowa counties with the worst overall abuse rates in 2009 were, beginning with the worst, Wapello, Appanoose, Webster, Lee and Blackhawk. Those counties are in the range of 30 to 50 abused kids per 1,000. The five with the lowest rates: Howard, Mills, Sioux, Clayton and Ida. Their range is about 5 to 8 per 1,000. (Polk County was right in the middle, 50th among the 99 counties or 17 per 1,000.) The patterns of abuse for the three prior years are similar to the one-year look at 2009.
• The five counties in which abuse rates were highest also had higher rates of child poverty and single-parent homes and generally had lower median incomes, higher unemployment and more out-of-wedlock births than did the counties in which abuse rates were lowest. Across all of Iowa in 2008, the out-of-wedlock births accounted for about 35 percent of all births. Statewide in 2008, births to unmarried teen mothers — children having children as the saying goes — accounted for 8 percent of all births.
• Judicial districts with higher numbers of termination cases also comprise counties high in reports of child abuse. The dots can’t be connected easily, because abuse may occur one year and termination of parental rights the next. Nevertheless, in looking at county-by-county data on reports of abuse and then looking at termination cases occurring in the appropriate judicial districts, you can find assurance that courts and DHS are following through on getting children out of unsafe homes. When you read family circumstances in appellate cases — presumably where families would have the strongest arguments for keeping kids — it is difficult to think the courts are acting too aggressively.
• Child abuse reported by DHS understates how many children are at risk. That’s because “child abuse” in the reports is abuse inflicted by a caregiver — a parent or guardian. If a relative or a live-in friend abuses a child, that abuse may be found in police reports but not in DHS data on child abuse.
• “Child abuse” itself is a sweeping label for the psychological and physiological suffering a child may endure. “Sexual” abuse amounts to about 4 percent of the abuse cases in Iowa, in contrast to a national figure of about 24 percent. “Neglect” — or denial of critical care — is generally the leading category of abuse in Iowa, reported in 81 percent of the cases. “Neglect” should not be dismissed as simply forgetting once in a while about a child’s medicine or skipping a doctor’s appointment. “Neglect” covers a range of damaging behavior by a caregiver. However, a parent or guardian who has no personal or public resources to provide care for a child would not come under the “neglect” classification.
• As for causes or settings of child abuse — the why and the where — a recent federal study offered no surprises in what you might expect. As in Iowa, abuse was more frequent in single-parent households, among stressed-out unemployed parents and in areas of poverty. Nationwide, abuse is more common in Hispanic and Black households, given that those families figure high in the unemployment, poverty and single-parent categories.
• Because of budget cuts and an early retirement program, the 222 Iowa social workers who investigated or assessed reports of child abuse will be cut to 211 and their caseloads increased from 11 to 12 “protective assessments” a month. The 449 social worker positions with an ongoing caseload of about 25 a month have been cut to 401 positions with a monthly caseload of about 27. In fiscal year 2009, Iowa spent about $62 million for child welfare, half of that in state money.
• Stephen Scott, executive director of Prevent Child Abuse Iowa (PCAI), said the crackdown on methamphetamine labs in Iowa has cut meth-related forms of abuse — such as exposing children to illegal drugs. His organization’s website is www.pcaiowa.org. PCAI is one of the more intense such organizations in the nation, given its statewide approach. Its focus in educational materials, workshops and other support for parents is on prevention — not on rehabilitation of abusers or care for the abused. Its goal is to eliminate all child abuse. At first that goal seems idealistic and unrealistic, but — really — what satisfaction can be taken if we declare that the child abuse rate in Iowa has been lowered to, say, only 5 per 1,000?
In short, for the sake of the children, “Iowa is a great place to raise a family” should be viewed as more of a continuing goal and a challenge than as an accomplishment or a boast. CV
Sidebar:
Iowa judges foster the protection of children and families
By Herb Strentz
The way opponents of same sex-marriage paint the Iowa courts as threats to the family is curious when one considers how the state’s judges have improved protection of children at risk, respected the family and worked with the Department of Human Services in addressing child-abuse issues in Iowa.
While an organization called Common Sense PAC calls for ousting three Iowa Supreme Court justices in a retention vote in the Nov. 2 election, other states and a federal auditor are impressed by how Iowa’s courts deal with the welfare of children and their families.
Chief Justice Marsha Ternus and Justices David Baker and Michael Streit are targeted because they joined in the seven-member Supreme Court’s unanimous opinion in April 2009 that found the 1996 Iowa statute banning same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional because the law advanced religious interests, not the interests of government.
The court upheld the well-reasoned opinion of Polk County District Judge Robert Hanson, who also is on the retention ballot in November but — so far — is not targeted by those who would oust judges for paying attention to the Iowa constitution.
Ternus was appointed to the court in 1993 by then Gov. Terry Branstad , the 2010 Republican candidate for governor. Her Supreme Court colleagues elected Ternus chief justice in 2006.
The welfare of children in the judicial system is high on her agenda.
In her 2007 State of the Judiciary address to the Iowa Legislature, she emphasized the need to support children in foster care. Her 2008 address emphasized helping juvenile offenders turn their lives around.
Under case-administration standards established by Ternus, the Iowa courts keep a family’s abuse and termination cases in the hands of one judge — the practical effect of this is that a juvenile’s involvement in the judicial system is tracked by a judge familiar with the child’s and family’s history.
The work of Judge Larry Eisenhauer of the Court of Appeals exemplifies how Iowa judges foster the protection of children and families as Ternus staked out in her addresses to the Legislature.
Eisenhauer regularly deals with appeals of district court decisions in cases on termination of parental rights. To him, the legislature and the judiciary now put far more emphasis on the welfare of the child than on keeping a child in a home where there is a recognized risk of abuse. When he became a Juvenile Court judge in 1985, Eisenhauer says, he saw far fewer filings for termination of parental rights than is the case today.
Here is the material:
A three-member panel of the Court of Appeals reviews the record of a termination case to see if their reading of the case and the statutory requirements squares with what the District Court judge found.
In the courts, an appeals process often is a matter of months, perhaps even a year or more. But in cases of termination of parental rights, “You drop whatever you’re doing and read that case,” Eisenhauer says. Iowa expedites appeals of termination cases in a way that other states admire, Ternus and Eisenhauer will tell you. The fate of the child and the family is decided in a manner of weeks or a few months to minimize the family stress and risk involved.
The infusion of federal dollars into the general foster-care system also provides the courts with resources to better track abuse cases, Ternus says.
Strings are attached to the federal money to provide some uniformity in how cases are handled and to facilitate moving children from foster-care situations into permanent homes. To monitor use of the federal money, auditors visit states to evaluate programs and see how well the courts and human service agencies work together.
Ternus said that during a recent visit to Iowa, an auditor noted that it was the last of his 24 states to visit at the time and that he was impressed with the Iowa attitude and cooperative spirit between DHS and the courts.
The chief justice says she hopes that federal dollars can be found to strengthen programs dealing with juvenile delinquency, as has been done with children in need of assistance.
She says, “Iowa is a leader in using evidence-based assessment in helping minors in juvenile courts.” “Evidence-based assessment” is shorthand for using good research data and historical studies to handle individual cases instead of relying on anecdotal information, offhand impressions or fixed sentences to deal with a youthful offender.
Too often, Ternus says, the latter approach turns low-risk offenders into high-risk ones.
While Ternus and Eisenhauer are open about the daily efforts of Iowa’s judges to protect children and families and the work left to be done, neither commented about the campaign to remove judges based on their vote in the 2009 right to marry case.
Perhaps, the actions and work of Ternus, Eisenhauer and their colleagues on the bench should be answer enough. CV
Caption: Stephen Scott, executive director of Prevent Child Abuse Iowa, says the crackdown on methamphetamine labs in Iowa has cut meth-related forms of abuse.
