In re: K.H.-1, K.H.-2, and K.H.-3

No. 16-0195 (W. Va. Sept. 6, 2016) · Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia · September 6, 2016 · No. No. 16-0195

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the termination of petitioner mother S.H.'s parental rights to three children following continued substance abuse, failure to comply with services, and failure to acknowledge the conditions underlying the abuse and neglect proceedings. The court held that no reasonable likelihood existed that the conditions could be substantially corrected and that termination was necessary for the children's welfare. The court also upheld the denial of post-termination visitation because continued contact would not be in the children's best interests.

Holdings

  1. Termination of mother's parental rights was proper because her continued substance abuse, failure to comply with rehabilitative services, and failure to acknowledge the conditions of abuse and neglect established that there was no reasonable likelihood that she could substantially correct those conditions and that termination was necessary for the children's welfare.
  2. The denial of post-termination visitation was proper because mother presented no evidence that continued visitation would serve the children's best interests, while her continued substance abuse and failure to acknowledge the abuse and neglect conditions indicated that continued contact would be detrimental.
  3. The circuit court's findings were not clearly erroneous, and the Supreme Court found no substantial question of law or prejudicial error.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the circuit court erred by terminating mother's parental rights when she argued that less-restrictive dispositional alternatives and an additional improvement period were available.
  2. Whether the circuit court erred by denying mother post-termination visitation with the children.
  3. Whether the circuit court's factual findings and conclusions in the abuse and neglect proceeding were clearly erroneous or otherwise legally unsupported.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (10)

  • In re K.H., 235 W. Va. 254, 773 S.E.2d 20 (2015)(cited)
  • Melinda H. v. William R. II, 230 W. Va. 731, 742 S.E.2d 419 (2013)(cited)
  • State v. Brandon B., 218 W. Va. 324, 624 S.E.2d 761 (2005)(cited)
  • State v. Edward Charles L., 183 W. Va. 641, 398 S.E.2d 123 (1990)(cited)
  • In Interest of Tiffany Marie S., 196 W. Va. 223, 470 S.E.2d 177 (1996)(followed)
  • In re Cecil T., 228 W. Va. 89, 717 S.E.2d 873 (2011)(followed)
  • In re Timber M., 231 W. Va. 44, 743 S.E.2d 352 (2013)(followed)
  • In re: Charity H., 215 W. Va. 208, 599 S.E.2d 631 (2004)(followed)
  • In re Christina L., 194 W. Va. 446, 460 S.E.2d 692 (1995)(followed)
  • In re Daniel D., 211 W. Va. 79, 562 S.E.2d 147 (2002)(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…