Twelve Webster County child abuse and neglect cases have been decided this year by the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals, and almost all of them have dealt with parents losing their rights because of their drug abuse.On December 11, 2012, the Commentator reported on five recent cases decided from September through November, 2012 (see link at end of this article). Earlier this year, from January through June, 2012, the Court decided yet another seven child abuse and neglect cases, as summarized below.
First, on January 18, 2012, the Supreme Court upheld the termination of a mother’s parental rights because of her continued drug abuse. This mother failed to acknowledge that she had a substance abuse problem, even after testing positive for marijuana and opiates on four separate occasions after she was given an improvement period by the Circuit Court. This mother even told the Judge that she would not quit using marijuana and “sees nothing wrong with its continued use.” In light of her position, the Court found that there was no reasonable likelihood that the mother would correct the conditions of abuse and neglect (her parenting skills were seriously impaired from the continued drug abuse).
The full opinion of this first case can be accessed at this link:
Second, also on January 18, 2012, the Supreme Court upheld the termination of a psychological father’s rights because of his failure to protect a child with whom he had bonded. In this case, the psychological father allowed the mother to repeatedly use drugs in the presence of the child and allowed the child to have contact with inappropriate persons. Although this psychological father mostly tested negative on his drug screens, a search of his home found a “detox” kit used to mask drug use on drug screens. He defied the Circuit Court’s Order not to allow contact by the mother with the child. Again, the Court found that this psychological parent was no likely to correct the conditions of abuse and neglect found by the Court.
The full opinion of this second case can be accessed at this link:
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-1210memo.pdf
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-1210memo.pdf
Third, on February 28, 2012, the Supreme Court reversed the Judge’s decision to terminate the parental rights of the mother. The mother in this case was accused of knowing that the father sexually abused their daughter and not protecting the child from that father. The Judge found that both parents were abusive and neglectful in that regard. The West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources (WV DHHR) recommended that the mother’s custodial rights be terminated.
One of the big issues in this case was whether the Prosecuting Attorney properly followed the recommendations of his client, i.e., the WV DHHR. After questioning by the Judge, the Prosecutor agreed with the Judge that the Judge could terminate the parental (and not just the custodial) rights of the mother.
The Supreme Court found that the Prosecutor did not act inappropriately as he was merely agreeing with the Judge’s interpretation of the law. However, because the WV DHHR did not recommend the termination of parental rights, the Supreme Court reversed the decision, sending the case back to the Judge to reconsider a new case plan for the parties.
The full opinion of this third case can be accessed at this link:
The fourth and fifth cases, decided on March 12, 2012, are separate appeals by a mother and a father who both had their parental rights terminated. This case began when police found drug paraphernalia and items used to create methamphetamine in their home. Many capped and uncapped needles were found in the home. The needles and drugs were readily accessible to the children. Both parents were later convicted of attempting to make meth and were each sentenced to one to three years in prison.
In both of these cases, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals ruled that:
"In the present matter, there was an abundance of evidence that the children were in danger; the components of a methamphetamine laboratory were found in the home where the children were residing. Petitioner denies that these materials were used for making drugs, but made no explanation for the possession of most of the materials. Moreover, petitioner pled guilty to charges regarding the attempt to operate a methamphetamine laboratory. Furthermore, the testimony of the investigating officers and the DHHR worker showed that there were capped and uncapped needles in the home, and evidence that some of the needles were used. Petitioner Father denies this, but the circuit court determined that his denial was not credible. This Court finds no error in the adjudication or in the termination of parental rights without an improvement period."
The full opinions of both of these fourth and fifth cases can be accessed at this link:
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-1403memo.pdf
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-0774memo.pdf
Sixth, on April 16, 2012, the Court upheld the termination of a father's parental rights because of his substance abuse that was affecting his judgment and ability to properly provide for the children's health, safety, and welfare. The father admitted to snorting prescription pills. Drug paraphernalia was found in his home. After being granted an improvement period, he continued to test positive for drugs. When given the chance to participate in drug abuse counseling and treatment, this father reverted back to continued drug abuse. The Supreme Court found no error in the decision to terminate made by the Circuit Judge, stating that there was no reasonable likelihood that the conditions of abuse or neglect could be corrected in the near future.
In both of these cases, the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals ruled that:
"In the present matter, there was an abundance of evidence that the children were in danger; the components of a methamphetamine laboratory were found in the home where the children were residing. Petitioner denies that these materials were used for making drugs, but made no explanation for the possession of most of the materials. Moreover, petitioner pled guilty to charges regarding the attempt to operate a methamphetamine laboratory. Furthermore, the testimony of the investigating officers and the DHHR worker showed that there were capped and uncapped needles in the home, and evidence that some of the needles were used. Petitioner Father denies this, but the circuit court determined that his denial was not credible. This Court finds no error in the adjudication or in the termination of parental rights without an improvement period."
The full opinions of both of these fourth and fifth cases can be accessed at this link:
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-1403memo.pdf
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-0774memo.pdf
Sixth, on April 16, 2012, the Court upheld the termination of a father's parental rights because of his substance abuse that was affecting his judgment and ability to properly provide for the children's health, safety, and welfare. The father admitted to snorting prescription pills. Drug paraphernalia was found in his home. After being granted an improvement period, he continued to test positive for drugs. When given the chance to participate in drug abuse counseling and treatment, this father reverted back to continued drug abuse. The Supreme Court found no error in the decision to terminate made by the Circuit Judge, stating that there was no reasonable likelihood that the conditions of abuse or neglect could be corrected in the near future.
The full opinion of this sixth case can be accessed at this link:
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-1237memo.pdf
Seventh, on June 25, 2012, the Court upheld the termination of a mother's parental rights. This mother previously and voluntarily gave up her rights to another child, and she was ordered not to have further contact with convicted felons. She then had another child. The father of the new child was a convicted felon. Under the law, the WV DHHR had a mandatory duty to file this case in light of the prior termination of rights regarding the other child.
The convicted felon father of the new child admitted to drug abuse and his prior convictions for breaking and entering, driving under the influence, and the sale of methamphetamine and cocaine. The Circuit Court allowed the new child to remain with the mother provided she not permit contact with the convicted felon father, or any other felon. She was given a two year rehabilitation period. Less than fourth months into that rehabilitation period, the Circuit Court found that she involved herself with another man who had his own parental rights terminated and who was involved in drugs.
The Supreme Court agreed with the termination of the mother's rights because the mother had been unable to dissociate herself from men who are addicted to drugs and who jeopardize the health, safety, and welfare of both the mother and child. This mother lost her rights because she repeatedly exposed her child to substance abusers.
The full opinion of this seventh case can be accessed at this link:
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-1589memo.pdf
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-1237memo.pdf
Seventh, on June 25, 2012, the Court upheld the termination of a mother's parental rights. This mother previously and voluntarily gave up her rights to another child, and she was ordered not to have further contact with convicted felons. She then had another child. The father of the new child was a convicted felon. Under the law, the WV DHHR had a mandatory duty to file this case in light of the prior termination of rights regarding the other child.
The convicted felon father of the new child admitted to drug abuse and his prior convictions for breaking and entering, driving under the influence, and the sale of methamphetamine and cocaine. The Circuit Court allowed the new child to remain with the mother provided she not permit contact with the convicted felon father, or any other felon. She was given a two year rehabilitation period. Less than fourth months into that rehabilitation period, the Circuit Court found that she involved herself with another man who had his own parental rights terminated and who was involved in drugs.
The Supreme Court agreed with the termination of the mother's rights because the mother had been unable to dissociate herself from men who are addicted to drugs and who jeopardize the health, safety, and welfare of both the mother and child. This mother lost her rights because she repeatedly exposed her child to substance abusers.
The full opinion of this seventh case can be accessed at this link:
http://www.courtswv.gov/supreme-court/memo-decisions/spring2012/11-1589memo.pdf
Our prior article about the five recent abuse and neglect cases decided between September and November, 2012 can be accessed at this link:
http://webstercommentator.blogspot.com/2012/12/wv-supreme-court-kept-busy-with-webster.html
No comments:
Post a Comment