In Re: A.U.
17-0198
W. Va.Jun 19, 2017Background
- DHHR filed an abuse and neglect petition in June 2015 alleging mother (F.H.) used methamphetamine while pregnant, failed to follow medical advice and provide adequate prenatal care, and allowed the father to create a dangerous situation at the hospital.
- The child remained in DHHR custody; mother admitted the petition allegations and sought an improvement period but requested continuances delaying proceedings.
- At adjudicatory proceedings (Feb–Apr 2016) hospital staff testified; court found both parents were abusing parents and that mother lacked capacity to safely parent; improvement period denied.
- At the July 2016 dispositional hearing, DHHR and guardian recommended termination; no witnesses were called and the court found mother’s deficiencies could not be substantially corrected soon.
- By order entered January 25, 2017, the circuit court terminated mother’s parental rights; the child is placed with and is to be adopted by the maternal grandmother.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the circuit court erred by terminating parental rights without using a less-restrictive dispositional alternative | Mother: court should have used temporary commitment to DHHR with placement with maternal grandmother as a less-restrictive alternative | DHHR & guardian: termination is proper where there is no reasonable likelihood conditions can be substantially corrected in the near future | Court affirmed termination: where no reasonable likelihood of substantial correction exists, termination may be used without intervening less-restrictive alternatives |
Key Cases Cited
- In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W.Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (1996) (standard of review for circuit court findings in abuse and neglect cases)
- In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (2011) (review standard cited)
- In re Katie S., 198 W.Va. 79, 479 S.E.2d 589 (1996) (termination may be employed without less-restrictive alternatives when no reasonable likelihood conditions can be substantially corrected)
- In the Interest of Carlita B., 185 W.Va. 613, 408 S.E.2d 365 (1991) (noting priority and harm of procedural delays in child abuse and neglect cases)