In re S.S.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reviews a father’s appeal from an order terminating his parental rights and denying his motion for a post-adjudicatory improvement period. The court holds that the circuit court clearly erred in assessing the father’s incarceration, acknowledgment of substance-abuse issues, procedural timing, lack of a bond with the child, and rehabilitation efforts. The court reverses the denial of the improvement period, vacates the termination of parental rights, and remands for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. The circuit court abused its discretion in denying B.M.'s motion for a post-adjudicatory improvement period because its decision rested on clearly erroneous factual findings and improper consideration of material factors.
2. A respondent's current incarceration does not necessarily preclude an improvement period when the record shows that the respondent will soon be released and can participate during the remaining statutory period.
3. A parent's refusal to characterize himself as an addict does not, by itself, establish a failure to acknowledge a substance-abuse problem when the parent has admitted substance abuse and taken steps toward treatment.
4. A circuit court may not attribute procedural delays not caused by the respondent to that respondent in deciding whether to grant an improvement period, and the absence of a preexisting bond caused by incarceration is not alone determinative of eligibility.
5. The order terminating B.M.'s parental rights had to be vacated because the court's denial of the improvement period was reversed; the court did not decide the independent propriety of termination under West Virginia Code § 49-4-604(c)(6).

Questions Presented

1. Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by denying B.M.'s motion for a post-adjudicatory improvement period.
2. Whether the circuit court clearly erred in finding that B.M. could not participate in an improvement period because of his incarceration.
3. Whether the circuit court clearly erred in finding that B.M. failed to acknowledge his substance-abuse problem.
4. Whether the circuit court improperly relied on procedural delay, the absence of a parent-child bond, and the child's best interests in denying the improvement period.
5. Whether the termination of B.M.'s parental rights should remain in effect after the denial of the improvement period was reversed.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded