801 S.E.2d 260
W. Va.2017Background
- Infant A.L.C.M. born alive at ~25 weeks; umbilical cord toxicology positive for cocaine, opiates, codeine, hydrocodone, and oxycodone. Twin died at birth.
- Mother admitted to substantial prenatal illegal drug use; she later voluntarily relinquished parental rights.
- DHHR filed an abuse-and-neglect petition after A.L.C.M.’s birth alleging prenatal drug exposure harmed the newborn and that Father failed to protect the child.
- Father moved to dismiss, relying on State v. Louk to argue parents cannot be charged for injuries inflicted while the child was in utero. Circuit court certified the question to the West Virginia Supreme Court.
- The Supreme Court reformulated the certified question to focus on a born-alive child and whether drugs in the newborn’s system at birth are sufficient evidence to support an abuse/neglect petition.
- Court held that presence of illegal drugs in a child’s system at birth is sufficient evidence that the child is abused and/or neglected to support filing a petition; did not decide whether petitions may be filed for unborn children still in utero.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (DHHR) | Defendant's Argument (Father) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether presence of illegal drugs in a newborn’s system at birth is sufficient evidence to file an abuse/neglect petition | Positive toxicology at birth shows prenatal substance abuse that harmed or threatened the child’s health/welfare and fits statutory definitions of abuse/neglect | Cites Louk: parents cannot be charged for injuries occurring in utero; petition cannot be based on prenatal conduct | Yes. For a child born alive, illegal drugs in the child’s system at birth may constitute sufficient evidence of abuse/neglect to support filing a petition |
| Whether the Court should decide petitions directed at unborn children (in utero) | DHHR’s petition was filed after birth; focus should be on the born-alive child and conditions at time of filing | Father urged broader rule precluding liability for prenatal conduct | Court declined to decide petitions aimed at unborn children; reformulated question to the born-alive context and limited holding accordingly |
Key Cases Cited
- Martino v. Barnett, 215 W.Va. 123 (2004) (Court may reformulate certified questions)
- Kincaid v. Mangum, 189 W.Va. 404 (1993) (Court’s power to reformulate certified questions)
- State v. Louk, 237 W.Va. 200 (2016) (addressed criminal liability for prenatal conduct; relied on by Father)
- In re Betty J.W., 179 W.Va. 605 (1988) (statutory definition includes parent who knowingly allows another to commit abuse)
- West Virginia Dep’t of Health & Human Res. ex rel. Wright v. Doris S., 197 W.Va. 489 (1996) ("knowingly" does not require presence at time of abuse; parent presented with sufficient facts may be charged)