Background
The Department of Human Services (DHS) initiated abuse and neglect proceedings in October 2023, initially listing the mother, J.C., as a non-offending parent while targeting the father, whose parental rights to other children had already been involuntarily terminated. The children, H.S. and A.S., were living with their mother in a homeless shelter. After the father’s parental rights to H.S. and A.S. were terminated in June 2024, the DHS amended its petition to allege that the mother had left the shelter with the children without notice and was evading contact. A second amended petition followed in November 2024, alleging that the mother had actively concealed the children from Child Protective Services, neglected their medical care to keep them hidden, and facilitated prohibited contact between the children and the terminated father.
At an adjudicatory hearing in January 2025, the mother stipulated to the allegations in the second amended petition, admitting to failures of judgment and an inability to provide a safe environment. The circuit court adjudicated her as an abusing and neglecting parent and granted her a post-adjudicatory improvement period, requiring her to cooperate fully with service providers, participate in therapy and parenting classes, and have no contact with the father.
At a dispositional hearing in July 2025, the mother sought a further post-dispositional improvement period. Her own testimony, however, revealed that she had maintained daily contact with the father throughout the improvement period while actively lying to CPS workers about it. She also disclosed the time and location of a supervised visit to the father, who arrived at a nearby business in an agitated, armed state and threatened to shoot the mother, children, and visitation supervisor—forcing all of them to barricade in a bathroom until he was arrested. The mother admitted she had known of his violent tendencies beforehand and had said nothing. The circuit court denied the motion, found no reasonable likelihood the conditions of abuse and neglect could be corrected, and terminated the mother’s parental, custodial, and guardianship rights on August 27, 2025.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s order in a unanimous memorandum decision. On the denial of a post-dispositional improvement period, the court held that the circuit court acted within its discretion. Under West Virginia Code § 49-4-610(3)(D), a parent seeking a post-dispositional improvement period must demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances and a likelihood of full participation. The court declined to disturb the circuit court’s credibility determination that the mother lacked genuine insight into her conduct, reiterating that witness credibility is exclusively the province of the trier of fact and that appellate courts do not reweigh evidence.
On the termination of parental rights, the court held that the evidence adequately supported the circuit court’s finding that there was no reasonable likelihood the conditions of neglect and abuse could be substantially corrected. Citing long-standing precedent, the court reaffirmed that termination may be employed without resorting to less restrictive alternatives when that statutory finding is made. The mother’s continued, covert contact with the father during the improvement period—culminating in an armed, life-threatening confrontation at a children’s visitation—demonstrated an inadequate capacity to solve the problems of abuse or neglect even with the help of court-ordered services.
The court further noted that compliance with discrete case-plan tasks such as therapy and drug screening does not preclude a finding of overall failure to improve parenting attitude and approach. Because termination was also found to be in H.S. and A.S.’s best interests—giving them permanency and stability through adoption in their current placement—the court found no error in the disposition.
Key Takeaways
- A parent is not entitled to a post-dispositional improvement period as of right; the circuit court has discretion to deny one when the parent has failed to demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances or a likelihood of full participation.
- Partial compliance with case-plan requirements (attending therapy, parenting classes, drug screening) does not compel a finding of overall improvement; a court may still conclude that the parent lacks the capacity to correct the conditions of abuse or neglect.
- Termination of parental rights may proceed without less restrictive alternatives when there is no reasonable likelihood conditions of abuse or neglect can be substantially corrected in the near future and termination is in the child’s best interest.
- Appellate courts will not disturb a circuit court’s credibility findings or reweigh evidence in abuse and neglect proceedings.
Why It Matters
This decision underscores the limits of formal case-plan compliance as a shield against termination. Courts in West Virginia—and by extension other jurisdictions with similar statutory frameworks—will look beyond a parent’s participation in mandated services to assess whether that parent has genuinely internalized the need to protect the children. Where a parent continues prohibited conduct, lies to child welfare workers, and places children in direct physical danger, a circuit court need not grant additional time simply because the parent attended classes or passed drug tests.
The case also illustrates the weight courts place on protecting children from domestic-violence dynamics. Even where a mother presents herself as a victim of the father’s abuse, her choice to maintain secret contact with him, disclose visitation details, and conceal his known violent propensities from supervisors can independently support a finding of inadequate parenting capacity—and ultimately justify termination in favor of a permanency plan that provides the children safety and stability.