In re I.H., O.H., and R.H.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the termination of petitioner mother Y.G.’s parental rights to I.H., O.H., and R.H. The court upheld findings that the mother failed to protect I.H. from sexual abuse, failed to acknowledge the conditions of abuse and neglect, and could not substantially correct those conditions in the near future. The court also reminded the circuit court of its duties regarding permanent placement and periodic placement review.

Holdings

1. The court declined to address the assignment of error because petitioner's brief failed to comply with West Virginia Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(c)(7) by lacking supporting legal authority and an adequately structured argument.
2. The circuit court properly adjudicated petitioner as an abusing and neglecting parent because clear and convincing evidence established that J.H. sexually abused I.H. and that petitioner knew of or failed to respond adequately to the abuse and failed to protect the children.
3. The circuit court properly terminated petitioner's parental rights because her continued failure to acknowledge the abuse and neglect established no reasonable likelihood that the conditions could be substantially corrected in the near future, and termination was necessary for the children's welfare.
4. After termination, the circuit court remained obligated to conduct periodic permanency reviews and pursue permanent placement for any child who had not yet achieved permanency.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court clearly erred in adjudicating petitioner as an abusing and neglecting parent based on her failure to protect I.H. from sexual abuse and related neglect.
2. Whether the circuit court erred in terminating petitioner's parental rights after finding 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.
3. Whether the circuit court erred by not considering or disclosing an in camera interview with R.H. when petitioner failed to support that assignment of error with legal authority.
4. Whether the circuit court had continuing duties to pursue permanency for the children after termination of parental rights.

Disposition

affirmed