In Re: D.B., 16-1124

In July 2016 DHHR filed an abuse-and-neglect petition after petitioner J.B. (father) was allegedly intoxicated, lost track of his 10‑year‑old child, and the child was later found at the home of a person with prior neglect adjudication. Police and a CPS worker observed J.B. intoxicated; J.B. later admitted he had an alcohol problem but denied drinking on the incident day.
A protection plan initially barred J.B. from contact with the child and the residence; J.B. signed it but shortly thereafter was accused of breaking into that residence and stealing items, and of using stolen credit cards.
At the September 2016 adjudicatory hearing the circuit court found J.B. neglected the child based on findings he was intoxicated that day and suffered from substance abuse; the court held J.B.’s request for a post‑adjudicatory improvement period in abeyance.
At disposition the DHHR presented testimony that J.B. had prior alcohol‑related incidents and failed to pursue treatment or services in this or prior proceedings; J.B. continued to deny intoxication at the time of the incident despite contrary testimony.
The circuit court denied J.B.’s motion for a post‑adjudicatory improvement period, concluded he would not acknowledge the problem, and terminated his parental, custodial, and guardianship rights; the child was placed with her maternal grandmother.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (J.B.)	Defendant's Argument (DHHR/court)	Held
Whether the circuit court erred in denying a post‑adjudicatory improvement period	J.B. argued he should be granted an improvement period because he admitted alcoholism and was willing to participate in treatment to address substance abuse	DHHR and circuit court argued J.B. failed to engage with services, did not contact DHHR for an extended time, and denied the core allegation (drinking on the incident day), undermining credibility and likelihood of compliance	Court affirmed denial: J.B. failed to show by clear and convincing evidence he was likely to fully participate; his denial made treatment futile

In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W.Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (W. Va. 1996) (standard of review for circuit‑court findings in bench trials)
In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (W. Va. 2011) (affirming standards for reviewing abuse-and-neglect findings)
In re Timber M., 231 W.Va. 44, 743 S.E.2d 352 (W. Va. 2013) (parent must acknowledge the problem for improvement period to be effective)
In re Charity H., 215 W.Va. 208, 599 S.E.2d 631 (W. Va. 2004) (acknowledgment of abuse/neglect allegations is prerequisite to effective remediation)
Michael D.C. v. Wanda L.C., 201 W.Va. 381, 497 S.E.2d 531 (W. Va. 1997) (appellate court gives deference to trial court credibility determinations)
James M. v. Maynard, 185 W.Va. 648, 408 S.E.2d 400 (W. Va. 1991) (guardian’s role continues until child placed in a permanent home)