In re: J.G., II, 809 S.E.2d 453

Infant J.G. II was born prematurely with opiates, marijuana, and benzodiazepines in his system; DHHR filed an abuse & neglect petition and the child was placed with foster parents (petitioners) at six weeks old and remained there for ~32 months.
Respondents (parents) repeatedly tested positive for drugs, missed or were impaired during visits, engaged in domestic violence, and had unstable housing; a psychological evaluation warned of guarded parenting prognosis.
The circuit court repeatedly granted multiple pre- and post-adjudicatory improvement periods (many six-months) and continued them repeatedly despite DHHR and guardian ad litem objections and evidence of noncompliance.
A serious safety event occurred on October 1, 2016: during an overnight visit the CPS worker found the infant screaming and a parent incapacitated and injured; DHHR moved for termination thereafter.
At disposition the circuit court ordered a gradual transition of the infant back to parents based on recent claimed improvements; petitioners appealed and this Court stayed the return pending appeal.

Issue	Petitioners' Argument	Respondents' Argument	Held
Whether the circuit court violated statutory/procedural time limits for improvement periods (WV Code §49-4-610; Rules)	Court exceeded statutory limits by granting multiple and overly long pre- and post-adjudicatory improvement periods without required findings; statutory requirements were ignored causing unlawful delay	Recent parental progress justified continued improvement periods and delayed disposition	Reversed: court erred — time limits and mandatory findings were disregarded; delays unlawful and prejudicial to child's permanency
Whether the court abused discretion by returning the child to respondents instead of terminating parental rights	Given long history of drug use, domestic violence, negligent supervision (October 1 incident), and lack of credible evidence of sustained improvement, the court should have terminated rights and secured permanency with foster parents	Parents claim current sobriety, bonding with child, and constitutional parental custody rights; favored reunification when possible	Reversed: abuse of discretion to return child; belated/uncorroborated improvement insufficient after prolonged delays; directed termination and pursuit of permanency (post-termination visitation may be considered)

In re Tiffany Marie S., 196 W. Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (1996) (standard of review for circuit-court findings in abuse/neglect trials)
In re Jamie Nicole H., 205 W. Va. 176, 517 S.E.2d 41 (1999) (requirements for granting extensions of post-adjudicatory improvement periods)
In re Carlita B., 185 W. Va. 613, 408 S.E.2d 365 (1991) (court must review improvement-period performance; child welfare paramount)
In re Emily, 208 W. Va. 325, 540 S.E.2d 542 (2000) (statutory regulation of improvement periods and limits)
In re Hunter H., 227 W. Va. 699, 715 S.E.2d 397 (2011) (preserving foster placement where child bonded and thriving despite parental assertions)
In re Edward B., 210 W. Va. 621, 558 S.E.2d 620 (2001) (vacating dispositional orders when statutory process is substantially disregarded)
In re Christina L., 194 W. Va. 446, 460 S.E.2d 692 (1995) (post-termination visitation may be appropriate where in child’s best interest)
In re Billy Joe M., 206 W. Va. 1, 521 S.E.2d 173 (1999) (establish permanency plan before determining post-termination visitation)