Background
The West Virginia Department of Human Services filed an abuse-and-neglect petition after B.M.’s birth in December 2023. The father’s rights to two older children had been involuntarily terminated in May 2023, based on the parents’ continuing domestic violence and the father’s refusal to separate from the mother so that he could take custody of those children.
An amended petition alleged that the parents continued to engage in domestic violence during B.M.’s case, resulting in repeated law-enforcement involvement. Although the father obtained a protective order after one incident and claimed he would not continue the relationship, he remained in regular contact with the mother, including while she was incarcerated. The circuit court adjudicated him as an abusing and neglecting parent, denied his request for an improvement period, and terminated his parental, custodial, and guardianship rights.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed. Clear and convincing evidence supported adjudication because B.M.’s health and welfare were threatened by the parents’ ongoing domestic violence and their stated intent to continue the relationship. The father had also failed to correct the same conditions that led to the earlier involuntary termination of his rights to two other children.
The circuit court acted within its discretion in denying an improvement period. The father did not show by clear and convincing evidence that he was likely to participate fully, particularly because he had repeatedly engaged in domestic violence despite no-contact orders and did not express an intention to independently protect B.M. from the mother. Termination was proper because the circuit court found no reasonable likelihood that the conditions could be substantially corrected in the near future and found termination necessary for the child’s welfare.
Key Takeaways
- A child need not be physically present during domestic violence for that violence to threaten the child’s welfare and support adjudication.
- A parent’s continuation of the conduct underlying prior terminations can establish failure to correct those conditions in a later abuse-and-neglect case.
- A court may deny an improvement period when the parent does not prove likely full participation and may terminate rights without a less restrictive alternative when correction is not reasonably likely and termination serves the child’s welfare.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that domestic violence between parents may support abuse-and-neglect findings where it poses an ongoing threat to a child, including a newborn. It also emphasizes the importance of permanency where a parent continues the conduct that led to earlier terminations and cannot demonstrate a credible plan to protect the child.