Summary
The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed the termination of petitioner mother A.E.'s parental rights to eight children. The court held that petitioner relied on an inapplicable statutory provision concerning ADA accommodations and did not challenge the findings supporting termination under West Virginia Code § 49-4-604(c)(6).
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the circuit court erred by terminating Mother's parental rights without requiring the DHHR to provide ADA-compliant services.
- Whether the circuit court clearly erred in finding that Mother lacked an understanding of the allegations and the changes necessary to correct the conditions of abuse and neglect.
- Whether termination of Mother's parental rights was appropriate under West Virginia Code § 49-4-604(c)(6).
Holdings
- Mother was not entitled to relief based on § 49-4-604(c)(5)(C) because the circuit court did not impose disposition under that subsection; it imposed disposition under § 49-4-604(c)(6), and Mother failed to address the applicable statutory basis for termination.
- The circuit court did not clearly err because its finding was based on the explicit conclusion of the psychologist who evaluated Mother that her lack of understanding of the allegations prevented her from accurately understanding the necessary changes.
- Termination of Mother's parental rights was appropriate because there was no reasonable likelihood that the conditions of abuse and neglect could be substantially corrected in the near future and termination was necessary for the children's welfare.
Key quotations
“Termination of parental rights, the most drastic remedy under the statutory provision covering the disposition of neglected children, [West Virginia Code § 49-4-604] . . . may be employed without the use of intervening less restrictive alternatives when it is found that there is no reasonable likelihood under [West Virginia Code § 49-4-604(d)] . . . that conditions of neglect or abuse can be substantially corrected.” (5)
Factual background
The parents had an extensive history of CPS involvement and had received parenting, adult life-skills, and other services over approximately seven years and three abuse and neglect proceedings. The current petition alleged injuries to the children, an unsafe and unsanitary home, inadequate medical and dental care, educational neglect, inadequate supervision, and failure to meet the needs of a child with cerebral palsy. The circuit court found that Mother had intellectual deficiencies, had not made lasting changes despite extended services, could not substantially correct the conditions of abuse and neglect in the near future, and that termination was necessary for the children's welfare.
Procedural history
The DHHR filed an abuse and neglect petition in November 2019 and an amended petition in January 2020. After adjudicatory hearings, the circuit court adjudicated Mother as neglectful, denied her request for a post-adjudicatory improvement period, and terminated her parental rights by order dated July 14, 2021. Mother appealed, arguing that the DHHR had failed to provide services compliant with the ADA.