Background
The West Virginia Department of Human Services filed an abuse and neglect petition in June 2024 concerning five children after the oldest child, then sixteen-year-old C.B.-1, was found with a black eye and broken nose inflicted by her adult boyfriend and tested positive for methamphetamine and marijuana. The petition alleged that the parents failed to provide adequate supervision, protect the child, or seek medical treatment. The family had prior abuse and neglect proceedings in 2016 and 2021, the latter resulting in the mother’s adjudication for failing to protect her children from the father’s substance abuse.
In December 2024, the DHS filed an amended petition alleging that the parents exposed the children to inappropriate individuals with known and extensive substance abuse issues, including the parents’ adult son and his girlfriend, V.C., whose own parental rights had previously been terminated. At an adjudicatory hearing in January 2025, the mother stipulated to exposing her children to inappropriate individuals and was adjudicated neglectful on that basis. She then moved for a post-adjudicatory improvement period.
At a dispositional hearing in April 2025, testimony revealed that a CPS worker had warned the mother as far back as July 2023 that her adult son and V.C. were not to be around the children due to their ongoing methamphetamine use. Evidence including photographs showed C.B.-1 in a vehicle with the mother and V.C. in December 2023 and with her adult brother shortly after his release from jail on drug-related charges. The mother testified she did not believe additional parenting services were necessary because she had already completed similar services, and she disputed that her adult son was an inappropriate person.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s June 13, 2025, order denying the mother’s motion for a post-adjudicatory improvement period and terminating her parental rights to all five children. The court held that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying the improvement period because the mother failed to acknowledge either the need for services or the underlying conditions of neglect — a failure that, under established West Virginia precedent, renders the problem untreatable and makes an improvement period an exercise in futility at the children’s expense.
The court also rejected the mother’s argument that her parental rights were terminated based on grounds outside the scope of her adjudication. The mother contended the case mirrored In re Lilith H., 231 W. Va. 170 (2013), where termination was reversed because it rested on issues never properly adjudicated. The court distinguished that precedent, finding that the evidence at issue — including the prior abuse and neglect proceedings and the mother’s supervision of C.B.-1 — bore directly on the adjudicated condition of neglect: exposing children to individuals with known substance abuse problems. The prior history demonstrated the mother’s inadequate capacity to protect children from substance abuse, and the supervision evidence showed she facilitated the very contacts she had been warned to prevent.
Finally, the court declined to address the mother’s argument that the circuit court had improperly granted continuances beyond the deadlines established by the Rules of Procedure for Child Abuse and Neglect Proceedings, finding that the mother had agreed to some continuances and failed to object to others in the record, thereby forfeiting the issue on appeal.
Key Takeaways
- A parent seeking a post-adjudicatory improvement period under W. Va. Code § 49-4-610(2)(B) must demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence a likelihood of full participation; a failure to acknowledge the underlying problem defeats that showing and justifies denial.
- Evidence of prior abuse and neglect proceedings and related supervision failures is not extraneous at the disposition stage — it is properly considered where it bears directly on the parent’s capacity to correct the adjudicated conditions of neglect.
- A parent who agrees to continuances or fails to object to them in the trial court record cannot raise the resulting delays as grounds for reversal on appeal.
- Parental rights may be terminated under W. Va. Code § 49-4-604(c)(6) upon a finding of no reasonable likelihood of correction and a determination that termination is in the children’s best interests.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces the West Virginia Supreme Court’s consistent position that a parent’s genuine acknowledgment of neglect — not mere verbal assurances of future compliance — is the threshold requirement for obtaining an improvement period. Courts and practitioners should expect that a parent who disputes the seriousness of the adjudicated conduct, declines offered services, or attributes no fault to persons the agency has identified as harmful will face significant obstacles to avoiding termination, regardless of professed willingness to participate going forward.
The opinion also provides useful clarity on the scope of evidence admissible at disposition. By distinguishing In re Lilith H., the court confirms that prior CPS history and uncharged conduct remain fair game at the dispositional stage so long as they are probative of the parent’s capacity to correct the specific conditions underlying the adjudication — a standard that gives circuit courts meaningful latitude to consider the full context of a family’s child-welfare history.