Court: West Virginia Supreme Court; July 14, 1989; West Virginia; State Supreme Court
Kathryn T. appeals the Circuit Court of Wood County's decision to terminate her parental rights to her children, Carolyn Jean T. and Terry Jo T. She argues that there is a reasonable likelihood of correcting the alleged neglect or abuse, claims she was not given the full improvement period, asserts that the court erred in denying an additional improvement period, and contends that the "Improvement Period Plan" failed to meet statutory requirements. The children were subjected to a child abuse petition after Carolyn Jean suffered a skull fracture and bruises at six months old. The West Virginia Department of Human Services (DHS) was granted temporary custody, and an adjudicatory hearing found Kathryn guilty of physical abuse and neglect. Initially, she was granted a twelve-month improvement period, which was later extended for six months. However, the court found no reasonable likelihood of substantial improvement, citing the significant time elapsed and insufficient progress. The appeal does not contest the abuse and neglect adjudication. The court emphasized that the welfare of the children is paramount in custody decisions and that while parental rights are constitutionally protected, they can be limited or terminated if a parent is deemed unfit.
W.Va. Code § 49-6-5(c) allows courts to grant parents or custodians an improvement period of up to twelve months to address conditions affecting child safety. The circuit court granted Kathryn a twelve-month improvement period to create a safe, stable home for her children, which included terms such as securing permanent housing, employment, parenting classes, psychological treatment, and cooperation with the Department of Human Services (DHS). While the Plan did not explicitly prioritize the terms, it substantially complied with W.Va. Code § 49-6D-3 by outlining steps to identify and address family issues. Kathryn argued she substantially complied with the Plan, but DHS contended she lacked genuine motivation for change, citing inadequate cooperation with counseling services. The circuit court monitored her progress through periodic hearings and extended the improvement period by an additional six months to facilitate counseling. Ultimately, the court found insufficient evidence of Kathryn’s progress in addressing her responsibilities, determining no reasonable likelihood of substantial improvement. The court affirmed the termination of her parental rights, rejecting her claim of being denied a full improvement period, as she had received the full twelve months plus an extension. The decision of the Circuit Court of Wood County to terminate Kathryn's parental rights was upheld.
In juvenile and domestic relations cases involving sensitive information, the last names of the parties are not disclosed, as established in prior cases such as State ex rel. W.Va. Dep’t of Human Serv. v. Cheryl M. and others. The current proceeding does not address paternal parental rights. West Virginia Code § 49-6D-3 mandates that every family case plan must include: specific, measurable, and prioritized goals; identification of problems linked to each goal; a detailed description of the methods for achieving these goals by the assigned caseworkers and the abusing parent or guardian; a list of necessary departmental and community resources; a catalog of services to be provided; time targets for goal achievement; task assignments for all involved parties; and a schedule for task performance. Concerns are raised regarding certain terms in the Plan that may not meet the "realistic" standard, specifically citing Kathryn's situation where she was ineligible for HUD benefits while her children were not in her custody, yet was required to apply for these benefits monthly to demonstrate progress toward providing a stable home.
