Background
The West Virginia Department of Human Services filed an abuse-and-neglect petition shortly after J.T.’s birth, alleging that the mother’s untreated mental-health conditions, substance-abuse history, intellectual limitations, and violent relationships left her unable to care for the child. J.T. was initially removed but later returned to the parents’ physical custody subject to daily checks and continued services. The child was removed again after the parents failed to comply fully with services and the mother behaved aggressively and erratically during a psychological evaluation.
The mother stipulated that her borderline intellectual abilities affected her parenting and was adjudicated as abusing or neglecting J.T. She received an agreed three-month post-adjudicatory improvement period with extensive requirements, including adaptive-living assistance, domestic-violence programming, therapy, medication compliance, parenting education, and independent housing. The circuit court found that she participated inconsistently, failed to comply with mental-health treatment and medication requirements, and remained unable to care safely for the child. Relying in part on a psychologist’s opinion that her prognosis for improved parenting was very poor and that services could not remedy her parenting deficiencies, the court terminated her parental rights.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed. It rejected the mother’s claim that the DHS failed to provide reasonable accommodations and sufficiently tailored reunification services. The statutory provision she invoked expressly governed a different dispositional subsection, and she did not establish that she had a disability covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act. In any event, the record showed that the DHS made a thorough effort to tailor extensive services to her intellectual and mental-health needs, including a step-by-step parenting curriculum and provider guidance addressing her particular limitations.
The court also held that denying a continuance of the March 2025 dispositional hearing did not deprive the mother of a meaningful opportunity to be heard. Counsel represented her, presented evidence, and cross-examined witnesses at both dispositional hearings, and the mother attended the continued April hearing and testified. Finally, the evidence supported findings that there was no reasonable likelihood she could substantially correct the conditions of abuse or neglect and that termination was necessary for J.T.’s welfare and need for permanency. The circuit court therefore was not required to employ a less restrictive alternative.
Key Takeaways
- When parental neglect results from intellectual incapacity, social services must thoroughly assess whether intensive, long-term assistance would enable the parent to care adequately for the child; the record showed that the DHS satisfied that obligation here.
- A parent receives a meaningful opportunity to be heard when represented by counsel who presents and challenges evidence and when the parent later appears and testifies, even if the court denies a requested continuance of an earlier hearing date.
- Termination may occur without a less restrictive alternative when evidence establishes that the parent cannot substantially correct the conditions of abuse or neglect, even with assistance, and termination is necessary for the child’s welfare.
Why It Matters
The decision illustrates how West Virginia courts evaluate disability-related objections to reunification efforts: agencies must make a thorough, individualized effort, but termination remains permissible when tailored services are unsuccessful and expert evidence shows that additional assistance would not make safe parenting possible.
It also underscores that appellate challenges to improvement periods must be preserved. The mother could not obtain a post-dispositional improvement period without filing the required written motion, and she waived her challenge to the three-month post-adjudicatory period by agreeing to it below.