Background
In September 2024, the Department of Human Services (DHS) filed an abuse and neglect petition concerning A.S. after the child tested positive for amphetamines and fentanyl at birth. The child’s mother, S.S., also tested positive for multiple substances, including amphetamines, fentanyl, heroin, and opiates, upon hospital admission for childbirth and admitted recent heroin use. The DHS alleged that the mother’s substance abuse endangered A.S. and impaired her parenting ability.
The mother waived her preliminary hearing and, at her request, was ordered to receive services such as parenting and adult life skills classes, random drug and alcohol screening, and supervised visitation conditioned on clean drug screens. In April 2025, an adjudicatory hearing was held, where the circuit court found that the mother had abused and neglected A.S. based on her substance abuse. Following this finding, the mother filed a motion for a post-adjudicatory improvement period.
However, at the dispositional hearing in July 2025, testimony from a Child Protective Services worker and the mother herself established that the mother had knowingly failed to participate in any of the services offered. She admitted she was “not ready” to engage in services and anticipated a positive methamphetamine test. Consequently, the circuit court found no reasonable likelihood that the mother could substantially correct the conditions of abuse and neglect in the near future due to her non-participation and continued drug use. The court also concluded that no bond existed between the mother and A.S., and termination of parental rights was in the child’s best interests, particularly given the child’s young age and need for permanency. The circuit court then terminated the mother’s parental rights, from which she appealed.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the circuit court’s order terminating parental rights, finding no error in the denial of the mother’s request for a post-adjudicatory improvement period. The Court noted that, under West Virginia Code § 49-4-610(2)(B), a parent seeking an improvement period must demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, a likelihood of full participation. Referencing its prior holding in In re Charity H., the Court reiterated that an improvement period is not an unconditional entitlement and will not be granted if it jeopardizes the child’s best interests.
The Court found that the record clearly showed the mother’s knowing failure to participate in any of the services offered, even those she had initially requested. The mother herself acknowledged in her brief that this failure meant she “did not meet the standards for the granting of an improvement period.” Based on this evidence, the Court concluded that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying the post-adjudicatory improvement period.
Furthermore, the Court found that the same evidence supported the circuit court’s determination that there was no reasonable likelihood the mother could substantially correct the conditions of abuse and neglect in the near future, as defined by W. Va. Code § 49-4-604(d). The mother did not challenge the circuit court’s finding that termination was in the child’s best interests. Therefore, the Supreme Court concluded that the circuit court also did not abuse its discretion in terminating the mother’s parental rights, consistent with W. Va. Code § 49-4-604(c)(6), and affirmed the lower court’s dispositional order.
Key Takeaways
- A parent’s entitlement to a post-adjudicatory improvement period in West Virginia abuse and neglect cases is conditional upon demonstrating a clear likelihood of full participation in services.
- Courts prioritize the child’s best interests, and an improvement period will be denied if it would jeopardize the child’s welfare.
- Knowing failure to engage in court-ordered or requested services, even those aimed at parental rehabilitation, can justify the denial of an improvement period and ultimately lead to termination of parental rights.
- Continued substance abuse and admissions of being “not ready” to participate in corrective measures weigh heavily against a parent’s ability to correct conditions of abuse or neglect.
Why It Matters
This decision reinforces the high standard West Virginia courts place on parental accountability and active engagement in reunification efforts, particularly in cases involving substance abuse. It underscores that opportunities for parental improvement, such as an improvement period, are not granted automatically but depend on a parent’s demonstrated commitment to change and participation in required services.
For attorneys and child welfare advocates, the ruling highlights the critical importance of a parent’s tangible efforts to address issues leading to abuse or neglect. It reaffirms that the child’s need for permanency and a safe environment takes precedence, and judicial discretion to terminate parental rights will be upheld when a parent fails to utilize available services to correct harmful conditions, even if those services were initially requested by the parent. The decision further emphasizes that unchallenged findings, such as the child’s “best interests,” can be decisive in appellate review.