burden to establish exception in Iowa

2024“The court may exercise its discretion in deciding whether to apply the factors in section 232.116(3) to save the parent-child relationship based on the unique circumstances of each case and the best interests of the children.” In re A.R., 932 N.W.2d 588, 591 (Iowa Ct. App. 2019). “[O]nce the State has proven a ground for termination, the parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception to termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(3) . . . .” In re A.S., 906 N.W.2d 467 , 476 (Iowa 2018).

2024He contends the court could have elected not to terminate based on section 232.116(3)(a), which applies when “[a] relative has legal custody of the child.” The exceptions to termination found “in section 232.116(3) are permissive, not mandatory.” In re W.T., 967 N.W.2d 315 , 324 (Iowa 2021) (citation omitted). 10 “The court may exercise its discretion in deciding whether to apply the factors in section 232.116(3) to save the parent-child relationship based on the unique circumstances of each case and the best interests of the children.” In re A.R., 932 N.W.2d 588, 591 (Iowa Ct. App. 2019). “[O

2025“We may use our 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.’” M.W., 876 N.W.2d at 225 (citation omitted). “[O]nce the State has proven a ground for termination, the parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception.” A.S., 906 N.W.2d at 476.

2022Id. at 219 (citation omitted). 14 It is the State’s burden to prove grounds for termination exist by clear and convincing evidence; “the parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception” under Iowa Code section 232.116(3).

2025These exceptions “are permissive, not mandatory.” A.M., 843 N.W.2d at 113 . “[T]he parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception.” In re A.S., 906 N.W.2d 467 , 476 (Iowa 14 2018).

2023In re A.B., 957 N.W.2d at 294; In re A.M., 843 N.W.2d 100 , 110–11 (Iowa 2014). “[O]nce the State has proven a ground for termination, the parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception to termination” identified in section 232.116(3).

2024See In re A.S., 906 N.W.2d 467 , 476 (Iowa 2018) (“[T]he parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception to termination.”); see also D.W., 791 N.W.2d at 709 (“Although it is clear that [the mother] loves her son, our consideration must center on whether the child will be disadvantaged by termination, and whether the disadvantage overcomes [the mother’s] inability to provide for [the child’s] developing needs.”).

2023But the mother has not established that A.M. “will be disadvantaged by termination” and that the disadvantage from termination “overcomes [her] inability to provide for [A.M.’s] developing needs.” D.W., 791 N.W.2d at 709 ; see also In re A.S., 906 N.W.2d 467 , 476 (Iowa 2018) (holding “the parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception to termination”).

2022And while the older child did, at times, want the mother’s parental rights to remain intact, the mother did not present clear and convincing evidence supporting “a well-defined opinion [of the child] on the issue of termination, much less a clear objection to termination.” See In re A.J., 553 N.W.2d 909, 916 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996), overruled on other grounds by P.L., 778 N.W.2d at 39–40; see also A.S., 906 N.W.2d at 476 (“[T]he parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception to 11 termination . . . .”).

2021See In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d 33, 40 (Iowa 2010) (concluding the court need not discuss a step of the analysis when the parent did not dispute it); see also In re A.S., 906 N.W.2d 467 , 476 (Iowa 2018) (deciding the parent has the burden to establish an exception to termination under section 232.116(3)).

2020See In re A.S., 906 N.W.2d 467 , 476 (Iowa 2018) (providing that once the State proves a statutory ground for termination, “the parent resisting termination has the burden to establish an exception to termination under” section 232.116(3)); see also In re K.M., 653 N.W.2d 602, 606 (Iowa 2002) (“Any detriment [the child] will suffer as a result of the severance of the parental bonds is more than outweighed by the benefits that will accrue from her placement in a safe, stable, and support environment.”).

2019See In re A.S., 906 N.W.2d 467 , 476 (Iowa 2018) (providing that once the State proves a statutory ground for termination, “the parent resisting termination has the burden to establish an exception to termination under” section 232.116(3)); see also In re K.M., 653 N.W.2d 602, 606 (Iowa 2002) (“Any detriment [the child] will suffer as a result of the severance of the parental bonds is more than outweighed by the 6 benefits that will accrue from her placement in a safe, stable, and support environment”).

2023“The court may exercise its discretion in deciding whether to apply the factors in section 232.116(3) to save the parent-child relationship based on the unique circumstances of each case and the best interests of the children.” In re A.R., 932 8 N.W.2d 588, 591 (Iowa Ct. App. 2019). “[O]nce the State has proven a ground for termination, the parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception to termination under Iowa Code section 232.116(3) . . . .” In re A.S., 906 N.W.2d 467 , 476 (Iowa 2018).

2022See In re A.B., 815 N.W.2d 764, 773 (Iowa 2012) (“[T]he general rule that appellate arguments must first be raised in the trial court applies to CINA and termination of parental rights cases.”). 20 The father does not contest grounds for termination exist 7 but asserts, “There was no need to terminate his legal relationship with his children when the status quo could have been maintained in his own parents’ home.” We cannot agree. “[O]nce the State has proven a ground for termination, the parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception to termination.” A.S., 906 N.W.2d

2022And while the older child did, at times, want the mother’s parental rights to remain intact, the mother did not present clear and convincing evidence supporting “a well-defined opinion [of the child] on the issue of termination, much less a clear objection to termination.” See In re A.J., 553 N.W.2d 909, 916 (Iowa Ct. App. 1996), overruled on other grounds by P.L., 778 N.W.2d at 39–40; see also A.S., 906 N.W.2d at 476 (“[T]he parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception to 11 termination . . . .”).

2022Our “fundamental concern is the child’s best interests.” In re J.C., 857 N.W.2d 495, 500 (Iowa 2014).

2022“When the juvenile court orders termination of parental rights on more than one statutory ground, we need only find grounds to terminate on one of the sections to affirm.” In re T.S., 868 N.W.2d 425, 435 (Iowa Ct. App. 2015).

2020See Iowa Code §§ 537A.2 (2018) (“All contracts in writing, signed by the party to be bound or by the party’s authorized agent or attorney, shall import a consideration.”), .3 (“The want or failure . . . of the consideration of a written contract may be shown as a defense . . . .”); Margeson v. Artis, 776 N.W.2d 652, 656 (Iowa 2009) (noting that because “we presume a written and signed agreement is supported by consideration,” “a party asserting a lack-of-consideration defense has the burden to establish the defense”); Beal v. Milliron, 267 N.W. 83 , 85 (Iowa 1936) (“[T]he presumption created b

2019The application of the statutory exceptions to termination is “permissive not mandatory.” M.W. 876 N.W.2d at 225 . “[T]he parent resisting termination bears the burden to establish an exception to termination.” A.S., 906 16 N.W.2d at 476.

2019Dempsey v. State, 860 N.W.2d 860, 868 (Iowa 2015).

2017Ennenga v. State, 812 N.W.2d 696, 701 (Iowa 2012).

2000See Padzensky, 343 N.W.2d at 469 (holding that, when intervenor claims superior right to garnishment funds, inter-venor shoulders the burden to establish the claim).

1989Neylan v. Moser, 400 N.W.2d 538, 541 (Iowa 1987).

1989Neylan v. Moser, 400 N.W.2d 538, 541 (Iowa 1987).

1978Green v. Shama, 217 N.W.2d 547, 554-555 (Iowa 1974).