In Re: S.S.-1, S.S.-2, and C.S.
17-0609
| W. Va. | Dec 1, 2017Background
- DHHR filed abuse-and-neglect petition after referral that mother (S.S.-3) was homeless, living in her car, had substance-abuse problems, and children were living with others unaware of her whereabouts.
- CPS located mother at boyfriend J.H.’s home; officers found methamphetamine on J.H.; mother admitted recent hydrocodone use, a recent ‘‘mental breakdown,’’ and refused mental-health treatment.
- Court ordered mother to remain drug- and alcohol-free, submit to random drug screens, and comply with services; mother waived preliminary hearing and was later adjudicated an abusing parent based on substance use and an unfit home.
- Record showed multiple positive drug tests with laboratory confirmation (May 2016, September 2016, January 2017); mother submitted to only two random screens after September 2016, tested positive for hydrocodone (Jan 2017) and had a preliminary positive for benzodiazepines (Feb 2017) pending lab confirmation.
- Mother did not participate in offered services, ceased visitation after September 2016, allowed boyfriend to return to the home contrary to orders, and moved to Virginia; circuit court found no reasonable likelihood of correction and terminated parental rights; mother appealed, arguing the court erred by relying on an unconfirmed positive screen.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether termination was erroneous because the court relied on a preliminary positive drug screen lacking lab confirmation | The dispositional order relied on a February 2017 preliminary positive that had no lab confirmation at the time, so termination was unsupported | The court permissibly relied on the totality of evidence—multiple confirmed positives, noncompliance with screens and services, lack of visitation—so one preliminary screen did not control | Affirmed: court may consider the whole record; multiple lab-confirmed positives and pervasive noncompliance support termination |
| Whether there was a reasonable likelihood the conditions of abuse/neglect could be corrected | Mother implied ability to remedy conditions if given opportunity | DHHR and guardian pointed to refusal of treatment, inconsistent mental-health compliance, service closure, and cessation of visitation as evidence mother would not correct conditions | Affirmed: court found no reasonable likelihood of correction and termination was necessary for children’s welfare |
Key Cases Cited
- In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W. Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (W. Va. 1996) (standard for reviewing circuit court findings in bench-tried abuse-and-neglect cases)
- In re Cecil T., 228 W. Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (W. Va. 2011) (abuse-and-neglect standard of review reiterated)
- In re Katie S., 198 W. Va. 79, 479 S.E.2d 589 (W. Va. 1996) (parental visitation post-removal is material to potential for improvement)
- State ex rel. Amy M. v. Kaufman, 196 W. Va. 251, 470 S.E.2d 205 (W. Va. 1996) (cases addressing parental interest and standards in abuse-and-neglect proceedings)