In Re: S.P. and D.C.-1, 16-0652

DHHR filed abuse-and-neglect petition (Sept 2014) alleging parental substance abuse and domestic violence; emergency custody taken after providers observed parents intoxicated with children present.
Petitioner (D.C.-2) stipulated to domestic violence and substance abuse at adjudication and received post-adjudicatory improvement periods and monitoring; children were briefly returned then removed again after a June 2015 intoxication/domestic-battery incident.
Circuit court granted improvement periods and, at a December 2015 dispositional hearing, ordered petitioner to complete recommended services (batterer’s intervention, substance-abuse treatment, mental-health intervention).
Petitioner later admitted (March 2016) he missed the last three batterer’s-intervention classes, missed twelve drug screens, had consumed alcohol, and had not completed substance-abuse treatment because he thought it was unnecessary.
Circuit court delayed disposition twice, but after a final hearing in April 2016 terminated petitioner’s parental, custodial, and guardianship rights (May 11, 2016). Permanency plan: adoption in foster home.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by denying an extension of petitioner’s improvement period	Petitioner: mostly complied with services and has a strong bond with the children, so extension/extra time should be granted	DHHR/Court: petitioner did not substantially comply — missed classes and many drug screens, continued substance use, refused needed treatment	Denial affirmed: petitioner failed to substantially comply with improvement-period terms, so no extension warranted
Whether termination of parental, custodial, and guardianship rights was erroneous	Petitioner: partial compliance and parental bond weigh against termination; less-restrictive alternative should have been used	DHHR/Court: petitioner failed to complete required programs, continued risky conduct, refused to acknowledge role in domestic-violence incident, thus no reasonable likelihood of remediation; termination is in children’s best interests	Termination affirmed: statutory grounds met (no reasonable likelihood conditions will be corrected; reunification not in 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) (applies the standard of review and precedent for termination decisions)