Can domestic violence victims be adjudicated for neglecting their children? In re K.K. Explained

The Utah Court of Appeals addressed a challenging question in In re K.K.: whether a mother who is herself a victim of domestic violence can be found to have neglected her children by failing to protect them from exposure to violence in the home.

Background and Facts

Mother and Father were parents of triplets who were exposed to multiple acts of domestic violence, culminating in a June 2021 altercation witnessed by two of the children. Despite a criminal no contact order, Mother repeatedly allowed Father to return home. The State filed a petition alleging the children were neglected and abused. The juvenile court found Mother “not concerned” about protecting the children from domestic violence and determined she prioritized protecting Father over addressing the violence in their home.

Key Legal Issues

The court addressed whether the State proved by clear and convincing evidence that Mother neglected the children under Utah Code § 80-1-102(58)(a). The statute defines neglect as a parent’s “action or inaction” causing a child to experience “lack of proper parental care” or failure to “provide proper care necessary for the child’s health, safety, morals, or well-being.”

Court’s Analysis and Holding

The court of appeals affirmed the neglect adjudication, emphasizing that parents have a “statutory duty not to knowingly place their child in harm’s way.” The court found Mother’s “inaction” in failing to protect the children and her decision to prioritize her relationship with Father constituted neglect. Importantly, the court noted that domestic violence exposure can harm children even without direct physical violence toward them. However, the court declined to address the abuse adjudication, finding Mother could not demonstrate prejudice since both adjudications arose from the same underlying facts.

Practice Implications

This decision illustrates the complex intersection of domestic violence and child protection law. While acknowledging the difficulties faced by domestic violence victims, the court emphasized that victim status does not excuse the duty to protect children. The concurring opinion cautioned that courts should exercise care in finding abuse against domestic violence victims, requiring specific evidence and findings regarding harm to children. Practitioners should focus on evidence showing the victim parent actively prioritized the abusive relationship over child safety rather than merely remaining in the relationship.