In re M.S., J.S.-1, and P.S.

Summary

The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the termination of petitioner mother J.S.-2’s parental rights to M.S., J.S.-1, and P.S. The court held that she failed to demonstrate a substantial change in circumstances warranting a post-dispositional improvement period and that the conditions of abuse and neglect could not be substantially corrected. The court also upheld the denial of post-termination visitation with the younger children, while noting that limited visitation with M.S. and C.M. had been permitted.

Holdings

1. A parent who previously received an improvement period is not entitled to a post-dispositional improvement period absent proof of a substantial change in circumstances and a showing that the parent is likely to fully participate in the new improvement period. Petitioner failed to make that showing.
2. Termination of parental rights was proper because there was no reasonable likelihood that the conditions of abuse and neglect could be substantially corrected and termination was necessary for the children's welfare.
3. The circuit court's failure to place exceptional circumstances on the record before restricting access to in-camera interview recordings did not require vacation of the dispositional order because petitioner failed to demonstrate prejudice and the omission did not substantially disregard or frustrate the abuse and neglect process.
4. The circuit court did not err in denying post-termination visitation with J.S.-1 and P.S. because the evidence supported a finding that continued contact was not in their best interests; visitation with M.S. and C.M. was permissibly granted or limited at the caregiver's discretion and subject to restrictions.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by denying petitioner a post-dispositional improvement period.
2. Whether the circuit court properly terminated petitioner's parental rights after finding no reasonable likelihood that the conditions of abuse and neglect could be substantially corrected and that termination was necessary for the children's welfare.
3. Whether the circuit court's failure to make an exceptional-circumstances finding concerning in-camera interviews required vacation of the dispositional order.
4. Whether the circuit court erred in denying post-termination visitation with J.S.-1 and P.S. and limiting visitation with M.S. and C.M.

Disposition

affirmed