The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the Circuit Court of Ohio County's decision to terminate Mother K.F.'s parental rights to her two children, C.F. and I.F., in a memorandum decision filed Nov. 25, 2025. The case highlights the challenges courts face when parents repeatedly expose children to domestic violence despite completing previous rehabilitation programs.
The mother appealed the circuit court's Dec. 9, 2024, order, arguing that the lower court erred in denying her a post-adjudicatory improvement period and terminating her parental rights. The Supreme Court determined that oral argument was unnecessary and issued a memorandum decision affirming the circuit court's order.
The case began in 2021 when the Department of Health and Human Services filed an initial abuse and neglect petition. The petition alleged that the mother engaged in domestic violence with the father, abused substances, and suffered from untreated mental health issues. Both parents successfully completed post-adjudicatory improvement periods and regained custody of their children in January 2023.
However, less than a year later in November 2023, DHS filed another abuse and neglect petition alleging that the parents again exposed the children to domestic violence. The allegations were particularly troubling, as the children disclosed specific incidents of violence they witnessed. According to court documents, the children reported that their mother had threatened to stab their father in the throat with a knife, used a car to run over his foot, and poured bleach on his clothes.
The domestic violence had severe effects on both children's well-being and behavior. According to DHS, the turmoil within the household caused both children to manifest severe dysfunctional behaviors and repeatedly fall asleep in school. The agency also alleged that the mother was again abusing substances and failing to properly treat her mental health issues.
At the adjudicatory hearing in April 2024, the mother stipulated to engaging in domestic violence and acknowledged her mental health issues. The circuit court accepted her stipulation and adjudicated her of abusing and/or neglecting both children. Following this adjudication, the mother filed a motion for a post-adjudicatory improvement period, seeking another opportunity to address the issues that led to the removal of her children.
Both DHS and the guardian ad litem opposed the mother's request for a second improvement period. The circuit court held a hearing on the matter before ultimately denying the mother's request and proceeding with termination proceedings.
The case illustrates the difficult balance courts must strike between protecting children's safety and preserving family relationships. Under West Virginia law, parents who have previously completed improvement periods may be denied additional opportunities if they demonstrate a pattern of behavior that puts children at risk.
The timing of the second abuse and neglect case was particularly significant, occurring less than 11 months after the family was reunified following the successful completion of the first improvement period. This short timeframe between reunification and the second removal likely influenced the court's decision to deny the second improvement period.
Domestic violence cases involving children present unique challenges for child welfare systems. When children witness domestic violence, they can suffer psychological trauma that manifests in behavioral problems, academic difficulties, and sleep disturbances, as evidenced in this case where both children were falling asleep in school.
The mother's substance abuse and untreated mental health issues compounded the risks to the children. These factors, combined with the pattern of domestic violence, created an environment that the court determined was harmful to the children's safety and well-being.
The Supreme Court's decision to issue a memorandum decision rather than a full opinion suggests that the justices found the lower court's reasoning sound and the legal issues straightforward. Memorandum decisions are typically used when the law is well-established and the facts clearly support the lower court's conclusion.
This case serves as a reminder that while West Virginia's child welfare system provides opportunities for parents to address issues through improvement periods, these opportunities are not unlimited. When parents demonstrate a pattern of behavior that repeatedly puts children at risk, courts may determine that termination of parental rights is necessary to protect the children's safety and provide stability.
The decision also underscores the importance of addressing underlying issues such as domestic violence, substance abuse, and mental health problems comprehensively during improvement periods. Simply completing required programs may not be sufficient if the underlying behaviors and circumstances that endanger children are not meaningfully addressed.
For families facing similar challenges, this case highlights the critical importance of taking advantage of improvement periods to make lasting changes that protect children's safety and well-being. The court's decision reflects the principle that children's safety must be the paramount consideration in child welfare proceedings, even when that means permanently severing the parent-child relationship.