Background
The West Virginia Department of Human Services filed an abuse-and-neglect petition after S.S. reported that his stepmother, S.B., grabbed him by the neck, covered his mouth to stop him from screaming, and otherwise treated him roughly. His siblings corroborated that S.B. physically disciplined S.S. but not them. At adjudication, the father testified that he had seen S.S. with injuries and bruises but attributed them to a fight at school.
The circuit court adjudicated the children abused and neglected and found that the father failed to protect S.S. from the mother’s abuse. Although the father received services, he remained in a volatile relationship with the mother, was not candid about living with her, stopped individual therapy after only a few sessions, and missed supervised visits. S.S. had said he would not return to the father if the mother remained in the home.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the termination order. It held that the circuit court acted within its discretion in denying the father a post-dispositional improvement period because the evidence supported a finding that he was not likely to fully participate or improve. In particular, he failed to complete therapy, missed visits, continued the volatile relationship despite agency recommendations to separate, and did not acknowledge his own failure to protect S.S.
The Court also upheld termination rather than a less restrictive disposition. The record supported the circuit court’s finding that there was no reasonable likelihood that the conditions of abuse and neglect could be substantially corrected in the near future, and termination was necessary for the children’s welfare. The father did not challenge the best-interests finding on appeal.
Key Takeaways
- A parent seeking an improvement period must show by clear and convincing evidence that he or she is likely to fully participate.
- A parent’s failure to acknowledge the conditions requiring correction can make an improvement period futile.
- Termination may be ordered without less restrictive alternatives when correction is not reasonably likely in the near future and termination serves the child’s welfare.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that participation in some services does not itself demonstrate meaningful improvement. Courts may weigh incomplete therapy, missed visitation, continued unsafe relationships, and a parent’s lack of insight into the underlying neglect when deciding both improvement-period requests and final disposition.