Background
The West Virginia Department of Human Services filed an abuse-and-neglect petition in February 2025 alleging that B.M., while under the influence of amphetamines, inappropriately kissed then-fourteen-year-old M.M. as they stood in a road in approximately thirty-degree weather. M.M., whom the opinion describes as severely autistic and functioning at the level of a four-year-old, was not wearing socks, shoes, or a coat. B.M. later stipulated to the petition’s allegations and admitted using methamphetamine during the incident.
B.M. had been involved in four earlier abuse-and-neglect cases arising from substance abuse, including two proceedings involving M.M. in which she completed improvement periods and regained custody. At disposition, B.M. presented evidence that she had remained drug-free during the current case, completed 117 drug tests, pursued treatment and support programs, remained employed, and took autism-focused parenting classes. The circuit court nevertheless found that prior services had not prevented her recurring substance abuse and resulting risks to M.M., denied another improvement period, and terminated her parental rights.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed. It held that the circuit court acted within its discretion in denying a post-adjudicatory improvement period. Although B.M. complied with services during the current proceeding, her history showed that she had previously completed services and improvement periods but later returned to substance abuse after M.M. was restored to her care. That recurring pattern supported the determination that another improvement period was unlikely to correct the conditions of abuse and neglect.
The court also upheld termination rather than a less restrictive disposition. The record supported findings that there was no reasonable likelihood B.M. could substantially correct the conditions in the near future and that termination was necessary for M.M.’s welfare. Her repeated substance-related abuse-and-neglect proceedings, including three involving M.M., demonstrated that earlier treatment and services had not produced lasting change.
Key Takeaways
- A parent’s current compliance with services does not compel an improvement period when prior improvement periods were followed by renewed substance abuse and neglect.
- West Virginia circuit courts have discretion to deny an improvement period when the record shows that further services are unlikely to produce lasting improvement.
- Parental rights may be terminated without first imposing a less restrictive alternative when the conditions cannot reasonably be corrected in the near future and termination is necessary for the child’s welfare.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that courts may evaluate a parent’s entire abuse-and-neglect history, not merely short-term compliance during the pending case. Successful completion of earlier improvement periods can weigh against another opportunity when the same harmful conditions repeatedly return after reunification.
For practitioners, the opinion illustrates how evidence of repeated relapse, prior services, and a child’s heightened care needs can support both denial of an improvement period and immediate termination at disposition.