In Re: B.H., 16-1214

DHHR filed an abuse and neglect petition against mother (E.B.) after allegations she pointed a gun at her 13-year-old daughter (B.H.) and acquired a pitbull knowing B.H. was terrified of dogs.
Family Court previously issued a 180-day protective order granting custody to the child’s father (G.H.) after the domestic violence allegation.
At adjudication, DHHR witness and mother testified about the gun incident and the pitbull; mother admitted buying the dog to "help" B.H. and still owned it.
At disposition, DHHR/CPS testified mother refused to cooperate with a family case plan, refused psychological evaluation, and refused parenting/adult-life-skills classes because she would not admit the gun incident; supervised visits showed little bond.
The circuit court adjudicated mother as an abusing parent and terminated her parental, custodial, and guardianship rights on September 29, 2016; child was placed permanently with non-offending father.

Issue	Petitioner's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the court erred by not considering B.H.’s wishes before terminating parental rights	E.B.: court failed to hear the child and consider her wishes before termination	DHHR/guardian: child was under 14 and testimony showed child feared mother’s pitbull and did not want visitation	Court: No reversible error — child was under 14, not shown to be of discretion, and record showed child’s opposition and lack of bond
Whether termination was improper given denial of extension and late family case plan	E.B.: contends court erred in denying motion to extend post-dispositional improvement period and alleges DHHR failed to timely file a family case plan	DHHR: mother willfully refused to cooperate in developing a family case plan and refused evaluations/services; statutory grounds for termination exist	Court: Affirmed termination — statutory finding that no reasonable likelihood conditions could be corrected because mother refused to cooperate with a family case plan

In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (W. Va. 2011) (standard of review for bench trials in abuse and neglect cases)
In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W.Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (W. Va. 1996) (bench-finding review and clearly erroneous standard)
In re Edward B., 210 W.Va. 621, 558 S.E.2d 620 (W. Va. 2001) (procedural compliance required in child abuse and neglect proceedings)
In re Emily G., 224 W.Va. 390, 686 S.E.2d 41 (W. Va. 2009) (consideration of child’s wishes and related procedural principles)