In the Interest of G.S., O.S., and C.S., Minor Children

Citation: Not availableDocket: 20-0022

Court: Court of Appeals of Iowa; April 15, 2020; Iowa; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

SummaryOriginalCytator Case TreatmentBackward CitatorAnalysis

EnglishEspañolSimplified EnglishEspañol Fácil

A father, N.S., appeals a juvenile court ruling from Story County that granted a limited waiver of confidentiality in his child-in-need-of-assistance (CINA) case involving his three children. This appeal follows a founded child-abuse assessment against him for sexual abuse of one of his children, resulting in his placement on the child-abuse registry. The juvenile court, during the dispositional hearing, cited evidence of N.S.'s potential danger to children, including graphic disclosures from his child, a troubling short story he wrote, and his troubling admissions about sexual attraction to children. The court characterized N.S. as a "serial child sex abuser" and noted concerns about his employment as a school bus driver, emphasizing the need for child protection and public safety. The court ordered a psychosexual evaluation for N.S. and allowed disclosure of certain findings to protect children from potential harm. Upon review, the appellate court found no legal basis for the extensive disclosure and reversed that part of the juvenile court’s order, remanding the case for further proceedings.

A narrowly tailored waiver of confidentiality under Iowa Code section 232.147 is deemed sufficient for the state or Department of Human Services (DHS) to disclose that N.S. poses an imminent risk of harm to children with whom he has unsupervised contact. This information may be shared with relevant private or government entities to protect children in the community. The waiver is intended to ensure compliance with legal duties to safeguard children and does not allow for a comprehensive review of juvenile court records. The identities of the involved children and their mother must be protected. N.S. appeals this aspect of the dispositional order but does not contest the order for a psychosexual evaluation or the adjudication of the children as Child in Need of Assistance (CINA).

Regarding the standard of review, while CINA proceedings are generally reviewed de novo, subsidiary rulings are reviewed for abuse of discretion. The court's discretion is deemed abused if its ruling relies on unreasonable grounds or misapplies the law. N.S. argues that the juvenile court's order to release specific findings was unauthorized by law. The State and the children's guardian ad litem assert that code provisions support the disclosure. However, the analysis concludes that the juvenile court lacked the broad statutory authority to permit such disclosures, constituting an abuse of discretion. Official juvenile court records, including the disclosures made, are generally confidential, and their release without a court order is limited to specific circumstances not applicable here.

A confidentiality provision stipulates that confidential public records can only be released by court order under Iowa Code section 232.147. The parties agree that this section does not allow for the waiver of confidentiality. The State argues that disclosure is permitted under Iowa Code chapter 235A, which governs the child-abuse registry, particularly since N.S. is listed as a perpetrator in a founded child abuse report. The State claims that the disclosure of registry information is consistent with confidentiality rules because such information can be disclosed by the department pursuant to a court order. However, the child-abuse registry’s confidentiality rules, including section 235A.15, restrict access to specific individuals and entities, such as those involved in the care of the child or the assessment of abuse. 

The State references section 235A.15(2)(e), which allows school officials access for volunteer or employment record checks, implying that the court order was meant to inform the school bus employer of potential dangers posed by N.S. However, the court’s order permits broader disclosures than the statutory provisions allow. While certain provisions might apply to the school and bus provider, the order extends beyond the narrow scope intended by the legislature. Additionally, it is argued that public schools do not qualify as responsible agencies under section 232.147(3)(e), meaning they cannot access confidential juvenile court records without a specific court order.

Disclosure of child abuse report data is governed by Iowa Code section 235A.19(3)(f), which allows subjects of a report to examine relevant data but restricts disclosure until the conclusion of any corrective proceedings, unless ordered by a court. The subjects include the child victim, their parents or guardians, individuals named as abusers, and their attorneys; third-party entities have no right to access the data. The Iowa Department of Human Services (DHS) has the exclusive authority to disclose this information, not the State or county attorneys. 

The General Assembly's Legal Counsel (GAL) cites Iowa Code section 232.71B(9) for protective disclosure, which permits the DHS to inform subjects of reports regarding registration in abuse or sex offender registries if necessary for child protection. This section similarly restricts disclosure to defined subjects and does not extend to third parties. 

Further, the State references Iowa Code sections 321.375(2) and (3)(e) concerning school bus driver qualifications, which allow employers to access the child abuse registry during hiring and contract renewal processes. However, the court's order for disclosure exceeds what is necessary for ensuring the safety of children on school buses.

Lastly, Iowa Code section 235A.17(1) outlines conditions for the redissemination of child abuse information, which is permissible only for official purposes, to recipients who can access the information independently, with a written record of the redissemination maintained and submitted to the registry within thirty days.

The section in question does not authorize the broad disclosure of child abuse registry information as ordered by the juvenile court. While the State, DHS, and county attorney are allowed to access this information under Iowa Code section 235A.15(2), they are not permitted to redistribute it to private entities as it falls outside their official duties, which require maintaining confidentiality except in specific circumstances. The order improperly allows disclosure to individuals and entities who would not otherwise have access to this information, such as friends or neighbors of the perpetrator, N.S. Furthermore, there is no evidence that the necessary written records were created as required under the applicable code sections. The court's intent to protect children is acknowledged, but the order exceeds statutory limits, allowing the State to inform any business or individual about N.S.'s potential risk to children, which is not authorized by law. Although there is a founded child-abuse report regarding N.S., confidentiality provisions exist to safeguard the privacy of both children and parents in CINA cases. The court's characterization of the order as a limited waiver of confidentiality is unfounded, as no statutory provision allows such a waiver in this context. The court is mandated to adhere to statutory authority, and therefore, its directive is deemed an abuse of discretion. The part of the dispositional order allowing for these disclosures is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings. The State's argument that the issue is moot due to compliance with the order is rejected, as the potential for continued disclosure remains significant.