## Facts

- Walter L. Williams and Bernice J. Williams cared for William Joseph Tabafunda, a 17-month-old child for whom Walter had assumed parental responsibility.
- Between September 1 and September 12, 1968, the child’s condition worsened from an apparent toothache to an abscess, severe infection, gangrene, and pneumonia.
- The parents gave aspirin and home care but did not seek medical treatment, though they knew medical help was available based on prior experience.
- They did not take the child to a doctor because they feared the welfare department would remove the child from their custody.
- Medical testimony indicated the condition likely existed for about ten days and that treatment within about a week of death probably would have saved the child.
- The child died on September 12, 1968, from pneumonia.
- The trial court found the parents were negligent in failing to obtain medical attention and that this negligence proximately caused the child’s death.

## Issues

1. Whether parents have a common-law duty to provide necessary medical care to a dependent child, independent of any statute.
2. Whether, under Washington’s manslaughter provisions then in effect, ordinary negligence that proximately causes death is sufficient for manslaughter.
3. Whether the evidence supported findings that the defendants’ omission was negligent and a proximate cause of the child’s death.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the manslaughter convictions.
- The court held a parental duty to provide necessary medical care exists at common law and is not dependent on statutory recognition.
- The court held Washington’s manslaughter scheme imposed liability where a homicide was not excusable, and “excusable” required a lawful act done with “ordinary caution”; lack of ordinary caution equated to ordinary negligence.
- The court concluded the trial court could reasonably find the defendants failed to exercise ordinary caution and that the omission proximately caused death.
- The court rejected the argument that a child-neglect statute requiring “willful” omission displaced manslaughter liability for non-willful but negligent omissions.

## Legal Principles

- Parents have a common-law legal duty to secure necessary medical care for dependent children; statutes may reflect that duty but are not its source.
- Under the then-applicable Washington manslaughter provisions, a homicide is excusable only if committed in a lawful act “with ordinary caution”; failure to use ordinary caution constitutes ordinary negligence sufficient for manslaughter when it proximately causes death.
- Ignorance, good intentions, or good faith do not excuse failure to meet the reasonable-person standard of ordinary caution in performing a parental duty.
- A specific statute penalizing “willful” failure to provide medical care does not preclude manslaughter liability where the omission is negligent rather than intentional misconduct.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed the defendants’ manslaughter convictions, holding that parents’ common-law duty to obtain necessary medical care may support criminal homicide liability and that, under Washington’s former statutory scheme, ordinary negligence proximately causing a child’s death was enough to establish manslaughter.


State v. Williams, 4 Wn. App. 908, 484 P.2d 1167 (Wash. Ct. App. 1971)