In Re: G.L., L.L., and A.L., 13-0559

DHHR filed abuse-and-neglect proceedings beginning June 2010 after parents were found unconscious with drug paraphernalia; prior 2007 proceedings and allegations of forcing children to shoplift and domestic violence were noted.
Circuit court adjudicated mother an abusing parent in July 2010; she was granted a post-adjudicatory improvement period with requirements (parenting classes, substance/psych evaluations, family therapy, random drug screens, supervised visitation, budgeting).
Mother substantially complied at review in March 2011; children were returned to physical custody and two children (L.L. and A.L.) were later dismissed from the proceedings in Sept. 2011; G.L. remained in DHHR custody for medical/treatment needs.
In 2012 DHHR filed an amended petition after mother’s incarceration for shoplifting, admission of recent marijuana use, and failure to participate in family therapy with G.L.; mother waived a preliminary hearing while incarcerated.
At the August 2012 adjudicatory hearing mother was found to be an abusing parent; the circuit court denied her motion for a new post-adjudicatory improvement period and, in April 2013, terminated her parental rights to all three children (post-termination visitation at children’s discretion).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the circuit court erred by denying mother a post-adjudicatory improvement period	Mother: court should have granted an improvement period allowing her to attempt rehabilitation and reunification	DHHR/Circuit Court: mother failed to show by clear and convincing evidence she would fully comply given prior failures, recent drug use, and incarceration	Denial affirmed — court has discretion and mother did not demonstrate likely full participation or compliance
Whether termination of parental rights was proper	Mother: termination was improper because she previously completed improvement periods and had regained custody of two children	DHHR/Circuit Court: continued drug abuse, incarceration, failure to comply with court-ordered therapy and minimal remedial efforts show no reasonable likelihood of near-future correction; termination is in children’s best interest	Termination affirmed — substantial evidence supported finding of no reasonable likelihood of correction and that termination served children’s best interests

In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W.Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (1996) (standard of review for circuit-court factual findings in abuse-and-neglect cases)
In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (2011) (reiterating standard of review and appellate deference to circuit court findings)
In re Kristin Y., 227 W.Va. 558, 712 S.E.2d 55 (2011) (courts need not pursue every speculative possibility of parental improvement before terminating rights)
In re R.J.M., 164 W.Va. 496, 266 S.E.2d 114 (1980) (same principle limiting speculative delay of termination)