In the Interest of: L.B., a Minor
177 A.3d 308
Pa. Super. Ct.2017Background
- Child L.B. was born January 2017; mother tested positive for marijuana and suboxone at birth and had previously tested positive while pregnant for opiates, benzodiazepines, and marijuana; the infant exhibited withdrawal symptoms and required hospital treatment.
- Clinton County Children and Youth Services (CYS) obtained emergency protective custody and filed a dependency petition alleging the child lacked proper care and alleging child abuse under 23 Pa.C.S. § 6303(b.1) based on mother’s prenatal illegal drug use.
- The trial court found the child dependent but deferred the abuse determination and later held that the CPSL does not permit a finding of abuse based on actions taken while the child was a fetus; CYS appealed.
- The legal question presented was whether prenatal illegal drug use by a mother can constitute child abuse under the CPSL if it causes, or creates a reasonable likelihood of, bodily injury to the child after birth.
- The Superior Court analyzed statutory definitions ("child," "bodily injury," and "recent act or failure to act") and concluded a fetus is not a "child" under the CPSL, but once born the infant is a "child" and prenatal acts may support an abuse finding if they causally and culpably produced post-birth bodily injury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a mother’s illegal drug use while pregnant can support a CPSL child-abuse finding | CYS: Prenatal drug use is a "recent act" that caused or created a reasonable likelihood of bodily injury to the child after birth and thus constitutes child abuse under § 6303(b.1)(1) or (5) | Mother: The CPSL does not apply to acts committed while the child was a fetus; a fetus is not a "child" under the statute so prenatal conduct cannot yield an abuse finding | The Superior Court: A fetus is not a "child" under the CPSL, but prenatal conduct can support an abuse finding if, by the mother’s intentional, knowing, or reckless act, it caused or created a reasonable likelihood of bodily injury to the child after birth; vacated and remanded for proceedings to determine if CYS meets its burden |
Key Cases Cited
- In re A.B., 987 A.2d 769 (Pa. Super. 2009) (statutory interpretation challenge standard of review)
- D.K. v. S.P.K., 102 A.3d 467 (Pa. Super. 2014) (review of statutory construction principles and standards)
- In re L.Z., 111 A.3d 1164 (Pa. 2015) (discussing that dependency adjudication may include finding a parent to be a perpetrator of child abuse under the CPSL)
- G.V. v. Dep’t of Pub. Welfare, 91 A.3d 667 (Pa. 2014) (discussing purposes of the CPSL and limited dissemination of indicated/founded reports)
- P.R. v. Dep’t of Pub. Welfare, 801 A.2d 478 (Pa. 2002) (context on reporting and impacts of abuse findings)
- C.B. v. J.B., 65 A.3d 946 (Pa. Super. 2013) (statutory construction principles cited by the court)