The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the Circuit Court of Ohio County's termination of a father's parental rights to three children in a case involving methamphetamine use and domestic violence that resulted in severe injuries to an infant.

In a memorandum decision filed Jan. 29, 2026, the high court rejected Father K.C.-41's appeal of the Feb. 21, 2025 order that terminated his parental rights to K.C.-1, K.C.-2, and K.C.-3. The father argued the circuit court erred in denying him an improvement period and proceeding with termination.

The case originated in late 2023 when the Department of Health and Human Services implemented safety services in the home after both K.C.-3 and the mother tested positive for methamphetamine upon the child's birth. The situation escalated in March 2024 when DHS received another referral regarding injuries to K.C.-3.

Initially, both parents claimed the infant was injured when the mother, who was holding the child, tripped over a rug, hit the wall, and fell to the ground. However, when the father was not present, the mother disclosed a different account of events. She revealed that the father struck her during an argument while she was holding K.C.-3 and must have hit the child as well. The mother confirmed that both K.C.-1 and K.C.-2 were in the home when this incident occurred.

According to DHS records, the mother had a bruise on her head where she claimed she was struck. The father denied any history of domestic violence and maintained that the mother had simply tripped over a rug. Medical examination revealed the severity of the infant's injuries, confirming that K.C.-3 suffered from non-accidental head trauma, including three separate skull fractures and extensive brain injuries.

During the DHS investigation, the father's account of events shifted. He initially denied striking the child but later claimed he must have accidentally hit the child when the mother stood up in front of him. According to DHS, the parents' explanations were inconsistent with the child's injuries.

The case proceeded through the family court system, where evidence was presented regarding the parents' substance use and the circumstances surrounding the infant's injuries. The circuit court ultimately determined that termination of parental rights was appropriate, finding that the father had not demonstrated the ability to provide a safe environment for the children.

On appeal, the father challenged the circuit court's decision, specifically arguing that he should have been granted an improvement period before his parental rights were terminated. Under West Virginia law, improvement periods allow parents additional time to address issues that led to state intervention, such as substance abuse or domestic violence.

The Supreme Court of Appeals determined that oral argument was unnecessary and issued a memorandum decision affirming the lower court's order. The court applied Rule 21 of the West Virginia Rules of Appellate Procedure, which allows for streamlined review in certain cases.

The decision reflects the state's commitment to protecting children from environments where domestic violence and substance abuse create ongoing safety risks. The case involved multiple children, with K.C.-1 and K.C.-2 present during the violent incident that severely injured their infant sibling K.C.-3.

The termination of parental rights is considered the most severe intervention available in family court proceedings. Courts typically require clear and convincing evidence that parents are unfit or that continued parental custody would be harmful to the children's welfare. The presence of domestic violence, particularly when it results in serious injuries to children, often weighs heavily in such determinations.

The case number 25-196 encompasses three separate proceedings for each child: CC-35-2024-JA-23, CC-35-2024-JA-24, and CC-35-2024-JA-25, reflecting the court's individual consideration of each child's circumstances while addressing the family situation as a whole.

The memorandum decision, while brief, represents the conclusion of a lengthy legal process that began with the children's positive drug tests at birth and culminated in the severe injuries to the infant. The father's appeal was his final opportunity to challenge the termination, but the Supreme Court found no error in the circuit court's handling of the case.

This case illustrates the intersection of substance abuse, domestic violence, and child welfare in family court proceedings. The court's affirmation sends a clear message about the state's prioritization of child safety over parental rights when those rights conflict with children's welfare and safety.