IN THE INTEREST OF G.P. and R.P., Minor Children, R.P., Father, Appellant.
from the Iowa District Court for Montgomery County, Amy
father appeals the termination of his parental rights.
Kenneth Whitacre, Glenwood, for appellant father.
J. Miller, Attorney General, and Anna T. Stoeffler (until
withdrawal) and Mary A. Triick, Assistant Attorneys General,
for appellee State.
Mailander, Anita, guardian ad litem for minor children.
Considered by Tabor, P.J., and Mullins and May, JJ.
father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his
two children under Iowa Code section 232.116(1)(e) and (f)
(2019). The father's argument on appeal is
limited to the following assertions, all apparently directed
at the court's findings under section 232.116(1)(e): (1)
"The State failed to prove that the father failed to
maintain significant and meaningful contact with the child
during the previous six (6) consecutive months, " (2)
"the court erred in finding that there was no meaningful
contact, " and (3) "[t]he State has failed to
attempt to help the father maintain contact with his
children." He fails to make any argument directed at the
findings under section 232.116(1)(f).
father has failed to cite to any legal authorities or point
to any facts in the record to support his arguments. "To
reach the merits of this case would require us to assume a
partisan role and undertake the appellant's research and
advocacy. This role is one we refuse to assume."
Inghram v. Dairyland Mut. Ins. Co., 215 N.W.2d 239,
240 (Iowa 1974). It is not our duty to "speculate on the
arguments [a party] might have made and then search for legal
authority and comb the record for facts to support such
arguments." Hyler v. Garner, 548 N.W.2d 864,
876 (Iowa 1996). The father's failure to mount an
argument or provide us with the facts he believes support
reversal waives error. See Iowa R. App. P.
6.903(2)(g)(3); In re C.B., 611 N.W.2d 489, 492
(Iowa 2000) ("A broad, all encompassing argument is
insufficient to identify error in cases of de novo
review."); see also Iowa R. App. P. 6.201(1)(d)
("The petition on appeal shall substantially comply with
form 5 in rule 6.1401); id. r. 6.1401–Form 5
("[S]tate what findings of fact or conclusions of law
the district court made with which you disagree and why,
generally referencing a particular part of the record,
witnesses' testimony, or exhibits that support your
position on appeal. . . . General conclusions, such as
'the trial court's ruling is not supported by law or
the facts' are not acceptable.").
we acknowledge termination-of-parental-rights appeals are
expedited and the opportunity for briefing is abbreviated,
see generally Iowa R. App. P. 6.201, the
father's position is not adequately formulated to
facilitate our review. Consequently, we affirm the
termination of the father's parental
 The children's mother's
parental rights were also terminated. She does not