The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the termination of a mother's parental rights after she failed to protect her 10-year-old daughter from sexual abuse by a family member living in their home.
In a memorandum decision filed January 29, 2026, the state's highest court rejected arguments from petitioner Mother A.W. that the Circuit Court of Wyoming County erred in its December 18, 2024, order terminating her parental rights. The mother had argued that the circuit court failed to require the Department of Health and Human Services to file a family case plan before proceeding with termination.
The case began in December 2023 when the DHS filed a petition alleging that the mother failed to protect her daughter, identified as M.P., from sexual abuse. During an interview with a Child Protective Services worker, the then-10-year-old child disclosed sexual abuse by "a man dressed in black."
According to court documents, the child described multiple incidents of abuse, including occasions when the perpetrator took her out late at night in the mother's boyfriend's vehicle and left her unattended. M.P. also described incidents that occurred in the home, including a time when the man kissed her while her mother was present.
The case expanded in January 2024 when the DHS filed an amended petition that included allegations of neglect regarding the children's basic needs. Court records indicate that M.P. was "obviously filthy and smelled terrible" when removed from the home and could not remember the last time she had showered.
At a preliminary hearing in January 2024, a CPS worker testified about developments following the initial petition filing. The mother and her boyfriend disclosed their belief that the "man in black" described by the child was the mother's brother, who resided in their home. When confronted by the mother, her brother admitted to masturbating in front of M.P., and the mother subsequently removed him from the home.
The circuit court held an adjudicatory hearing in March 2024, during which the mother submitted a written stipulation that the court reviewed thoroughly. The case involved two children, M.P. and D.S., as indicated in the case caption "In re M.P. and D.S."
The mother's appeal centered on procedural arguments challenging the circuit court's handling of the case. She contended that the court erred by failing to require the DHS to file a family case plan before proceeding with the termination of her parental rights. She also challenged the circuit court's ultimate decision to terminate those rights.
The Supreme Court of Appeals determined that oral argument was unnecessary for the case and that a memorandum decision was appropriate under West Virginia Rule of Appellate Procedure 21. This type of decision typically indicates that the court found the issues straightforward and the lower court's ruling clearly correct.
In parental rights termination cases, West Virginia courts must find clear and convincing evidence that termination serves the best interests of the child. The standard is high, reflecting the fundamental nature of parental rights while recognizing the state's duty to protect children from harm.
The case highlights the legal framework surrounding child protection proceedings in West Virginia. When the state intervenes in family situations involving allegations of abuse or neglect, it must balance parental rights with child safety. The progression from initial petition to termination of parental rights represents the most serious intervention available to protect children.
Termination of parental rights is considered the "death penalty" of family law because it permanently severs the legal relationship between parent and child. Courts reserve this remedy for situations where less drastic interventions have failed or would be insufficient to protect the child.
The case also demonstrates how family case plans function in child welfare proceedings. These plans typically outline specific steps parents must take to address the conditions that led to state intervention, such as completing counseling, attending parenting classes, or maintaining safe housing.
The mother's argument that the DHS failed to file a required family case plan suggests she believed she was entitled to an opportunity to remedy the situation before facing termination. However, the Supreme Court's affirmance indicates that any procedural issues either did not occur or did not warrant reversal of the termination order.
The case number 25-26 corresponds to the Wyoming County Circuit Court cases CC-55-2023-JA-63 and CC-55-2023-JA-64, indicating separate proceedings for each child that were consolidated for appeal purposes.
The Supreme Court's decision represents the final resolution of the case unless the mother seeks review by the U.S. Supreme Court, which would be extremely unlikely given the state law nature of the proceedings and the factual basis for the termination.
The ruling reinforces West Virginia's commitment to protecting children from sexual abuse and holding parents accountable when they fail to provide adequate protection, even when the perpetrator is a family member.