of law drawn from the evidence.” Id. However, termination of the parental rights of an Indian child shall not be ordered unless supported by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that “the continued custody of the child by the child’s parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the child.” Iowa Code § 232B.6(6)(a). The evidence must also include the testimony of a qualified expert witness as defined in section 232B.10. See Iowa Code § 232B.6(6)(a). To the extent the parents’ claims of error rest upon statutory interpretation, our review is for correction of errors of law. In re C.A.V., 787 N.W.2d 96, 99 (Iowa Ct.App.2010). The paramount concern in termination proceedings is the best interests of the child. See In re P.L., 778 N.W.2d at 39 (<HOLDING>). III. Analysis. Iowa Code chapter 232
holding that requiring a petitioner to establish by clear and convincing evidence that visitation is in the best interests of the child would provide effective protection for a parents choice except where the choice is plainly contrary to a childs best interests holding that an official has defrauded the public of his services if he secretly makes an official decision based on his own personal interests rather than the best interests of his constituents holding best interests are to be determined within statutory framework and not upon courts own perceptions holding that a modification of custody should not be based on one parents default because it is the childs best interests that are at stake recognizing that context under the pge analysis includes the preexisting common law and statutory framework within which the law was enacted