Background
The West Virginia Department of Human Services filed an abuse-and-neglect petition in January 2024 alleging that T.M. and the children’s stepfather used methamphetamine while caring for E.M. and K.M. T.M. stipulated to substance abuse and was adjudicated an abusing and neglecting parent. She received post-adjudicatory and later post-dispositional improvement periods requiring, among other things, substance-abuse treatment and drug screening.
Although T.M. completed inpatient treatment and one intensive outpatient program, she was discharged from or left other programs, tested positive for methamphetamine, at times refused drug screening, and eventually ceased contact with DHS. The circuit court also found that she lied about continued contact with the stepfather, despite a directive to stop contact, and made threats toward multidisciplinary-team members. She did not attend either scheduled dispositional hearing.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the termination of T.M.’s parental rights. It rejected her argument that termination was improperly based on her continued contact with the stepfather, an issue for which she had not been adjudicated. Her adjudication rested on substance abuse, and the circuit court had considered substantial evidence that she had not addressed that condition, including incomplete treatment, positive and refused drug screens, and disengagement from the case.
The court held that T.M.’s continued contact with the stepfather, dishonesty about that contact, and violation of the court’s directive were permissible considerations at disposition. The evidence supported the circuit court’s finding that there was no reasonable likelihood she could substantially correct the conditions of abuse and neglect in the near future and that termination was necessary for the children’s welfare. No less restrictive disposition was required.
Key Takeaways
- A termination decision may not rest fundamentally on unadjudicated abuse or neglect conditions, but the court may consider a parent’s conduct during the case when determining disposition.
- Repeated treatment failures, drug-screening noncompliance, dishonesty, and disengagement can support a finding that a parent cannot correct adjudicated substance-abuse conditions in the near future.
- Once the statutory findings are met and termination is necessary for the children’s welfare, West Virginia law permits termination without an intervening less restrictive alternative.
Why It Matters
The decision distinguishes between basing termination on a new, unadjudicated condition and considering post-adjudication conduct as evidence of a parent’s inability to remedy the adjudicated condition. It also underscores the weight courts may give to compliance with improvement-period services, candor with the court and MDT, and continued participation in child-welfare proceedings.