In Re: S.W.
16-1057
| W. Va. | May 22, 2017Background
- DHHR filed an abuse-and-neglect petition (Feb 2015) alleging C.W. had a long history of domestic violence toward his girlfriend’s children, twice was arrested for child abuse resulting in injury, and the home was in deplorable condition with inadequate medical care.
- Petitioner (father C.W.) admitted to the allegations in a written stipulation, was adjudicated an abusing parent, and was granted post-adjudicatory improvement periods and additional counseling.
- During proceedings, evidence showed children feared petitioner; a psychologist and visitation supervisor reported children’s fear and negative interactions during visits.
- Petitioner had multiple positive drug screens (marijuana and buprenorphine without prescription), missed 21 court-ordered screens, and ceased screening in May 2016; he failed to obtain appropriate housing.
- Service providers testified petitioner completed parenting and life-skills programs “on paper” but did not meaningfully implement changes; visits showed continued poor parenting behavior toward the children.
- The circuit court found no reasonable likelihood the conditions of abuse and neglect could be substantially corrected, terminated petitioner’s parental and custodial rights to S.W., and the child was placed with maternal grandparents (permanency plan: adoption).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether there was a reasonable likelihood petitioner could substantially correct conditions of abuse/neglect | Petitioner: lack of new charges, arrests, or allegations shows conditions were corrected | DHHR/Circuit Court: ongoing behavioral, substance, and compliance issues show conditions persisted | Court held no reasonable likelihood; termination affirmed |
| Whether petitioner complied with improvement period terms | Petitioner: asserted compliance/completion of services | Circuit Court: petitioner failed drug screens, missed screenings, lacked housing, and did not implement learned parenting skills | Court found petitioner noncompliant; improvement periods unsuccessful |
| Whether termination was necessary for the child’s welfare | Petitioner: implied termination unnecessary absent new incidents | Guardian/DHHR: child expressed fear; placement with relatives better for welfare | Court concluded termination necessary for child’s welfare and ordered termination |
| Whether circuit court’s factual findings were clearly erroneous | Petitioner: urged findings were erroneous given no new criminal charges | Circuit Court/DHHR: findings supported by testimony, drug tests, missed screens, and provider reports | Appellate court: findings not clearly erroneous; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W.Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (1996) (standard of review for bench-tried abuse and neglect cases)
- In re Cecil T., 228 W.Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (2011) (articulating appellate deference to circuit court findings in child welfare matters)
- In the Interest of Carlita B., 185 W.Va. 613, 408 S.E.2d 365 (1991) (court review of improvement period compliance at disposition)
- In re Faith C., 226 W.Va. 188, 699 S.E.2d 730 (2010) (application of improvement-period review principles)