Background
After W.J.’s birth, the Department of Human Services filed an abuse-and-neglect petition against both parents. The mother and child tested positive for buprenorphine, which the mother was lawfully prescribed as part of a medication-assisted treatment program; W.J. experienced withdrawal symptoms and required hospital care. The petition also relied on the parents’ prior involuntary terminations of rights to four older children, largely stemming from illicit substance use.
The parents admitted the petition’s allegations but sought post-adjudicatory improvement periods and admission to family treatment court. At disposition, they presented evidence that they had voluntarily participated in medication-assisted treatment since 2020, complied with counseling, drug screens, and pill counts, maintained employment and suitable housing, and stopped using cannabis upon learning of the pregnancy. The circuit court denied improvement periods, terminated parental rights, barred contact, and denied post-termination visitation.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals held that the circuit court abused its discretion by denying post-adjudicatory improvement periods and then terminating parental rights. The uncontroverted evidence showed the parents had made substantial and sustained progress in recovery after the earlier terminations and were likely to fully participate in an improvement period.
The court held that the circuit court improperly discounted evidence that the mother’s obstetrician knew of, and advised continuation of, her prescribed medication-assisted treatment. West Virginia law bars termination based solely on successful participation in such treatment. The circuit court also improperly gave great weight to cannabis use that occurred when the mother did not know she was pregnant, without evidence of later illicit use. Prior involuntary terminations did not automatically foreclose another opportunity to reunify where evidence showed changed circumstances.
Key Takeaways
- Successful, medically supervised medication-assisted treatment cannot itself justify terminating parental rights.
- Prior involuntary terminations do not automatically preclude a later improvement period when parents present evidence they remedied the prior conditions.
- A court must assess both the parents’ likelihood of participation and the child’s best interests on the actual record, rather than disregard evidence of sustained recovery.
Why It Matters
The court vacated the portion of the disposition order terminating parental rights, reversed the denial of improvement periods, and remanded. On remand, the circuit court must craft improvement-period terms, in consultation with the multidisciplinary treatment team, that protect W.J. and minimize disruption while giving the parents a meaningful chance to show they are fit and suitable parents.
The decision reinforces West Virginia’s statutory protection for parents who are successfully engaged in medication-assisted treatment and cautions against treating a prior termination history as dispositive when subsequent evidence demonstrates rehabilitation.