The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the Circuit Court of Mason County's termination of a mother's parental rights in a memorandum decision filed Nov. 25, 2025. The court upheld the lower court's order terminating the petitioner's parental rights to two children, identified as A.S.-1 and A.S.-2, and her custodial rights to a third child, E.S.
The case began in May 2024 when the Department of Health and Human Services filed a petition in the Circuit Court of Wood County alleging child abuse and neglect. The DHS accused the mother of subjecting the children to unsafe housing conditions and inappropriate physical discipline of E.S. When Child Protective Services personnel contacted the petitioner, she appeared unable to follow conversations and displayed erratic behavior, according to court documents.
The petition also revealed a troubling pattern of neglect. The DHS noted that the petitioner and children had been subjects of prior abuse and neglect proceedings in 2021, also involving inappropriate housing conditions. In that earlier case, the children were ultimately returned to the mother after she successfully completed an improvement period.
Following a preliminary hearing in June 2024, the case was transferred from Wood County to the Circuit Court of Mason County. At the adjudicatory hearing in August 2024, the petitioner stipulated to the allegation of unsafe housing conditions contained in the petition. Based on this stipulation, the circuit court adjudicated the petitioner as having neglected the children.
During the proceedings, both the DHS and the guardian informed the court that despite being provided with drug screening services, the petitioner had been noncompliant with the requirements. As a result, the circuit court ordered the petitioner to submit to additional requirements, though the specific details of these orders were not fully detailed in the available court documents.
The circuit court issued its order terminating the mother's parental and custodial rights on Nov. 20, 2024. The mother subsequently appealed to the state's highest court, arguing that the circuit court abused its discretion by denying her motion for a post-adjudicatory improvement period.
Post-adjudicatory improvement periods are designed to give parents an opportunity to address the conditions that led to neglect or abuse findings. These periods allow parents to demonstrate they can provide safe, appropriate care for their children before permanent termination of their rights occurs.
The West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, however, found no abuse of discretion in the lower court's decision. In its memorandum decision, the court determined that oral argument was unnecessary and that a written decision affirming the circuit court's order was appropriate under West Virginia Rule of Appellate Procedure 21.
Memorandum decisions are typically used for cases where the legal issues are straightforward or where established precedent clearly governs the outcome. The court's use of this format suggests the justices found the circuit court's reasoning sound and the appeal without merit.
The case highlights the state's approach to protecting children in situations where parents have demonstrated a pattern of providing unsafe living conditions. The fact that this was the second time in recent years that the mother faced abuse and neglect proceedings likely influenced the court's willingness to support termination rather than provide another improvement period.
Child protection cases involving termination of parental rights represent some of the most serious proceedings in family courts. Courts must balance the fundamental right of parents to raise their children against the state's compelling interest in protecting children from harm. West Virginia law requires clear and convincing evidence that termination is in the children's best interests.
The involvement of multiple children in this case - two biological children and one child in the mother's custody - underscores the scope of the neglect findings. The circuit court's decision to terminate rights to all three children suggests the court found the mother's ability to provide safe care was fundamentally compromised.
The noncompliance with drug screening requirements mentioned in the court documents may have been a significant factor in the circuit court's decision to deny the improvement period. Courts typically view cooperation with court-ordered services as essential to demonstrating a parent's commitment to addressing the issues that led to neglect findings.
The case serves as a reminder of the serious consequences parents face when they fail to maintain safe living conditions for children, particularly when there is a history of similar problems. West Virginia's family courts have shown they will act decisively to protect children when parents demonstrate an inability or unwillingness to provide appropriate care.
The Supreme Court of Appeals' affirmance of the termination order means the decision is final, and the children will remain in state custody or alternative placements designed to ensure their safety and well-being.