## Facts

- M.L. was the mother of five children, including J.W.G. and S.L.
- S.L. told M.L. and her father, B.L., that J.W.G. had touched her in an inappropriate sexual manner while she slept.
- M.L. and B.L. contacted law enforcement, which led to discovery that J.W.G. had also inappropriately touched another sister, J.P.
- J.W.G. was charged with unlawful sexual conduct and sexual assault on a child.
- Initially, J.W.G. remained in the family home while the other children were relocated.
- The Department of Human Services later placed J.W.G. in a foster home, and the other children returned home.
- The state filed a dependency-and-neglect petition against M.L. and the children’s fathers, alleging the children were neglected because they lacked proper parental care, they were domiciled without a parent through no fault of the parent, and their environment was injurious to their welfare.
- At the end of the jury trial, M.L. and the fathers objected to the proposed jury instructions and asked the court to require a finding that any “injurious environment” was injurious due to the acts or omissions of the parents.
- The state objected, arguing the statutory definition of an injurious environment did not include a parental-fault element.
- The trial court agreed with the state and did not include parental-fault language in the injurious-environment instruction.
- The jury found the children were in an injurious environment.
- After adjudication, custody of J.W.G. was granted to the department, while the other four children remained with the parents under the department’s supervision.
- M.L. appealed, arguing the jury should have been required to find parental fault; the court of appeals agreed with M.L.
- The state then appealed to the state supreme court.

## Issues

1. In a dependency-and-neglect adjudication based on an “environment injurious to the child’s welfare,” must the jury be instructed to find the injurious environment was caused by the parents’ acts or omissions?

## Decision

- The state supreme court held that the “injurious environment” ground for adjudication does not require proof that the parents’ acts or omissions caused the injurious conditions.
- The trial court therefore did not err by refusing to add parental-fault language to the jury instruction when the statute did not contain that requirement.
- The state supreme court reversed the court of appeals’ contrary conclusion and left the adjudication based on the statutory instruction in place (with further proceedings consistent with its opinion).

## Legal Principles

- A court interpreting a dependency-and-neglect statute applies the statutory text as written and should not add an element (such as parental fault) that the legislature did not include.
- Where the statutory scheme includes some grounds that expressly turn on parental acts or omissions and other grounds that do not, courts should avoid rewriting the latter category to mirror the former.
- An “injurious environment” inquiry centers on whether the child’s surroundings are harmful to the child’s welfare; it is not limited to conditions created by parental misconduct.
- Jury instructions in dependency adjudications should track the statutory elements; adding a non-textual fault requirement risks changing the state’s burden of proof.
- Evidence that serious abuse occurred within the household can support an injurious-environment adjudication even when parents took steps to report the abuse and involve authorities; the adjudication question focuses on the child’s welfare and safety in the home setting.

## Conclusion

In *In the Interest of J.G.*, the state supreme court rejected the argument that an adjudication based on an “injurious environment” requires a jury finding of parental fault. Because the statute’s injurious-environment definition does not include “acts or omissions of the parent,” the trial court properly instructed the jury using the statutory language, and the court of appeals erred by requiring an additional, non-statutory fault element.


In the Interest of J.G., 370 P.3d 1151 (2016)