In Re: T.N.-1, T.N.-2, T.N.-3, K.N., and H.N., 17-0565

Background

DHHR filed abuse and neglect petitions in March 2016 against Mother (A.W.) and Father based on prior CPS history, mental-health concerns, unstable housing, and domestic violence.
In 2014 Kentucky CPS had previously removed the children from Mother for one year; she later completed services and regained custody.
A 2016 altercation between the parents led to the children being left at a friend’s home without belongings; DHHR investigated and adjudicated Mother an abusing parent and granted a post-adjudicatory improvement period.
During the dispositional phase, witnesses (a pediatric nurse practitioner, a therapist, and a DHHR worker) testified that the children disclosed physical and sexual abuse and showed significant emotional harm (including suicidal threats by one child).
DHHR provided services (parenting classes, life skills, anger management); Mother obtained housing and underwent psychiatric evaluation but at times was noncompliant or difficult to reach and was arrested for battery during the proceedings.
The circuit court found no reasonable likelihood Mother could correct the conditions of abuse/neglect and terminated her parental rights; Father voluntarily relinquished his rights. The Court of Appeals affirmed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether termination was in children’s best interests given Mother’s compliance with improvement plan	Mother: She complied with services, obtained housing, underwent psychiatric evaluation, separated from husband, corrected petition allegations	DHHR: Mother’s compliance was partial/inconsistent; evaluations/recommendations undocumented; continued unsafe behavior (arrest); children suffered serious harm	Court: Affirmed termination — Mother failed to substantially correct conditions; termination necessary for children’s welfare
Whether evidence of physical/sexual abuse (not in petition) improperly supported termination	Mother: Termination relied in part on abuse allegations not pled in petition	DHHR/Guardian: Sufficient independent evidence of uncorrected conditions and necessity of termination without relying solely on those allegations	Court: Even without those specific allegations, record independently supported termination; no error
Whether circuit court’s factual findings were clearly erroneous	Mother: Contends court erred in assessing best interests and improvement	DHHR: Circuit court’s findings are plausible and supported by record; standard permits deference	Court: Findings not clearly erroneous under standard of review; affirmed
Whether less-restrictive alternatives should have been used before termination	Mother: Argued she had completed aspects of plan and less drastic measures appropriate	DHHR: Statute permits termination without intervening less-restrictive alternatives when no reasonable likelihood of correction exists	Court: Termination proper without less-restrictive steps given persistent conditions and prior services

Key Cases Cited

In re Cecil T., 228 W. Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (2011) (sets standard of review for circuit-court findings in abuse and neglect bench trials)
In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W. Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (1996) (describes clearly erroneous standard for factual findings)
W. Va. Dep’t of Human Servs. v. Peggy F., 184 W. Va. 60, 399 S.E.2d 460 (1990) (distinguishes compliance with parts of a plan from meaningful overall parental improvement)
In re M.M., 236 W. Va. 108, 778 S.E.2d 338 (2015) (participation in services requires implementing parenting skills taught)
In re R.J.M., 164 W. Va. 496, 266 S.E.2d 114 (1980) (termination may be used without intervening less-restrictive alternatives when no reasonable likelihood of correction exists)
In re Kristin Y., 227 W. Va. 558, 712 S.E.2d 55 (2011) (reaffirms statutory framework for termination where conditions cannot be corrected)