In re J.S., Z.S., K.S., A.S., and R.S.

Summary

The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the termination of petitioner mother C.S.’s parental and custodial rights to five children. The court held that the mother’s continued relationship with a person posing a potential risk to the children, together with her dishonesty and failure to acknowledge the conditions of abuse and neglect, supported findings that there was no reasonable likelihood of substantial correction. The court issued a memorandum decision under Rule 21, finding no substantial question of law or prejudicial error.

Holdings

1. The DHHR was not required to amend the petition to identify the boyfriend because the petition sufficiently alleged that mother failed to protect the children, and evidence that she later exposed them to another dangerous individual related to the conditions alleged in the petition.
2. The circuit court properly found that mother failed to remedy the conditions of abuse and neglect where she repeatedly concealed and continued a relationship with a person presenting a risk of harm to the children despite case-plan requirements and court directives.
3. A parent's compliance with some improvement-period terms does not preclude termination when the overall evidence shows that termination is required by the children's best interests and the conditions of abuse and neglect cannot be substantially corrected.
4. The circuit court was not required in this case to receive testimony from a licensed medical or mental-health professional concerning the psychological consequences of termination.
5. The record did not establish that the guardian ad litem failed to inform the circuit court of the children's wishes, and any alleged omission concerning placements, sibling separation, or a recommended disposition would not require restoration of mother's parental rights.
6. The circuit court made sufficient findings that the DHHR provided services, that there was no reasonable likelihood mother could substantially correct the conditions of abuse and neglect in the near future, and that termination was necessary for the children's welfare.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court erred by terminating mother's parental and custodial rights based on her continued relationship with and exposure of the children to a criminally involved boyfriend when the petition did not specifically identify that boyfriend.
2. Whether the circuit court could rely on mother's violation of the prohibition against exposing the children to the boyfriend when the prohibition was included in a family case plan and communicated by the multidisciplinary team and court.
3. Whether the evidence established no reasonable likelihood that mother could substantially correct the conditions of abuse and neglect in the near future.
4. Whether termination required testimony from a qualified medical or mental-health professional concerning the children's best interests.
5. Whether the guardian ad litem failed to perform required duties concerning the children's wishes, placements, sibling separation, or disposition recommendation.
6. Whether the circuit court failed to make sufficient findings concerning reasonable efforts, reunification, and the children's best interests.

Disposition

affirmed