In Re: I.S.
16-0658
| W. Va. | Nov 14, 2016Background
- DHHR filed an abuse-and-neglect petition after mother A.P. tested positive for amphetamines and cannabinoids after giving birth to I.S.; mother admitted recent methamphetamine injection and marijuana use before delivery.
- Mother had a history of intravenous drug use and prior involuntary termination of parental rights to two older children.
- Mother admitted the allegations and was adjudicated an abusing parent; the circuit court granted a post-adjudicatory improvement period requiring suitable housing and substance-abuse treatment.
- At disposition, testimony indicated mother made no successful progress in her improvement period and had not completed her family case plan.
- The circuit court denied the mother’s motion to extend her improvement period and terminated her parental rights to I.S.; the mother appealed solely as to the denial of the extension.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the circuit court erred by denying an extension of the post-adjudicatory improvement period | A.P. argued she should have been granted an extension despite not completing the family case plan | DHHR and guardian argued she did not substantially comply with improvement-period terms and prior terminations supported denial of extended efforts | The court held denial was not error: extension is discretionary and mother failed to substantially comply with terms, so no extension warranted |
| Whether DHHR was required to make reasonable efforts given prior terminations | A.P. contended she merited additional services/extension | DHHR relied on statute and prior involuntary terminations to show it was not required to provide further preservation efforts | The court agreed DHHR was not required to make reasonable efforts where parental rights to other children had been involuntarily terminated, supporting denial |
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 bench trials)
- In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (2011) (discussing appellate review in abuse-and-neglect proceedings)
- In re Emily, 208 W.Va. 325, 540 S.E.2d 542 (2000) (circuit court’s role in weighing witness credibility)
- Michael D.C. v. Wanda L.C., 201 W.Va. 381, 497 S.E.2d 531 (1997) (reviewing court cannot reassess witness credibility)
- In re Travis W., 206 W.Va. 478, 525 S.E.2d 669 (1999) (cited regarding factfinding and credibility in abuse-and-neglect cases)