The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court's decision to terminate a mother's parental rights following the birth of a drug-affected newborn. The court's November 25, 2025, memorandum decision affirmed the Circuit Court of Harrison County's December 27, 2024, order in *In re N.S.* (No. 25-64).
The case began when the Department of Health and Human Resources filed an abuse and neglect petition on September 17, 2024, after the mother, identified as R.S., gave birth to N.S., who was born drug-affected. According to court documents, the mother was incarcerated in July 2024 while twenty-nine weeks pregnant and tested positive for multiple controlled substances including amphetamines, THC, cocaine, and fentanyl.
When R.S. was admitted to the hospital to give birth, she again tested positive for controlled substances, specifically Subutex, which had been prescribed to her, and fentanyl. The DHS petition revealed that R.S. had a prior history with child protective services, having previously lost parental rights to an older child in a separate proceeding that was also based on her substance abuse.
During the adjudicatory hearing held in October 2024, the circuit court received several pieces of evidence that painted a troubling picture of the mother's circumstances. The court admitted the sentencing order from R.S.'s criminal proceedings, the child's birth records, and the dispositional order from her previous abuse and neglect case involving her older child.
The evidence showed that R.S. had been sentenced to one to fifteen years of incarceration after pleading guilty to felony possession of heroin with intent to distribute. The court determined that her incarceration would continue until at least April 2025, making it impossible for her to provide care for the newborn. The circuit court found that R.S. had abused multiple controlled substances during her pregnancy and was unable to care for N.S. due to her incarceration.
Crucially, the court also found that R.S.'s parental rights to another child had been previously terminated based on her substance abuse issues, establishing a pattern of behavior that influenced the current proceedings.
On appeal, R.S. argued that the circuit court made two critical errors: first, by denying her motion for a post-adjudicatory improvement period, and second, by terminating her parental rights altogether. A post-adjudicatory improvement period would have given her additional time to address the issues that led to the abuse and neglect findings while potentially maintaining some path toward reunification with her child.
However, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals found no merit in these arguments. The high court determined that oral argument was unnecessary in the case and issued a memorandum decision affirming the lower court's order, citing West Virginia Rule of Appellate Procedure 21.
The decision reflects the serious nature of cases involving drug-affected newborns and the complex considerations courts must weigh when determining whether to terminate parental rights. West Virginia, like many states, has specific procedures and standards for such cases, particularly when there is evidence of substance abuse during pregnancy and a history of prior child welfare interventions.
The case highlights the intersection of criminal law and family law, as R.S.'s incarceration on drug-related charges directly impacted her ability to care for her newborn. The timing of her sentence, which would keep her incarcerated well beyond the child's birth and into 2025, was a significant factor in the court's analysis.
The involvement of multiple controlled substances, including fentanyl, cocaine, amphetamines, and THC, during pregnancy raised serious concerns about the child's immediate safety and long-term welfare. Medical evidence showing that N.S. was born drug-affected provided concrete documentation of the impact of the mother's substance use on the child.
The prior termination of parental rights to another child created a particularly challenging legal landscape for R.S. Courts often view repeat offenses in child welfare cases as evidence of an inability or unwillingness to address underlying issues that put children at risk.
This case underscores the state's authority to protect children from harm while also reflecting the difficult circumstances that can lead to family separation. The memorandum decision format indicates that the appeals court viewed the legal issues as sufficiently clear that extensive written analysis was unnecessary.
The affirmation of the termination order means that N.S. is now legally free for adoption, allowing for permanent placement in a stable home environment. While such decisions represent the end of the legal relationship between parent and child, they are made with the primary consideration being the best interests and safety of the child involved.