In re A.T.-1 and A.T.-2

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the termination of petitioner father's parental rights to two children. The court held that he was not entitled to an improvement period and that termination was appropriate because he had an extensive criminal history, would remain incarcerated until 2025, and could not substantially correct the conditions of abuse and neglect in the near future. The court also concluded that termination was necessary to provide the children with permanency and continuity of care.

Holdings

1. The circuit court did not err in denying Father an improvement period because he did not demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that he was likely to fully participate, and the record did not show that he had moved for an improvement period or could participate in the necessary services while incarcerated.
2. The circuit court correctly found that there was no reasonable likelihood that Father could substantially correct the conditions of abuse and neglect in the near future.
3. The circuit court did not err by terminating Father's parental rights rather than using a less-restrictive alternative because termination was necessary to establish permanency and could be ordered without intervening less-restrictive alternatives when the conditions of abuse and neglect could not be substantially corrected.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court erred by denying Father an improvement period.
2. Whether the circuit court erred by terminating Father's parental rights rather than imposing a less-restrictive dispositional alternative.
3. Whether the evidence established no reasonable likelihood that the conditions of abuse and neglect could be substantially corrected in the near future and that termination was necessary for the children's welfare.

Disposition

affirmed