In re T.J

In re T.J. addresses three critical evidentiary and procedural issues in a child welfare case where the circuit court found a minor neglected based on the mother's refusal to administer prescribed anti-seizure medication. The court vacated the neglect finding, holding that the State failed to present sufficient evidence because it relied exclusively on medical records without live expert testimony explaining the necessity of the medication and consequences of non-treatment. The court rejected the notion that judges can reliably translate complex medical information into concrete medical conclusions without expert assistance, overruling dicta in In re Erin A. suggesting expert testimony is never required in medical-neglect cases.

The court also vacated the admission of a CAPS investigative report under the business-records exception, finding that hospital abuse-and-neglect investigative reports—which involve reviewing years of records, interviewing physicians, and reaching legal conclusions—exceed the scope of routine business records and lack required statutory certification. The report may be admissible on remand as an "indicated report" under a separate statutory provision.

Finally, the court vacated the order vacating the protective order, holding that the State's oral motion violated statutory procedure requiring a written petition and that the circuit court violated due process by denying the mother an opportunity to respond before severing the parent-child bond. This decision significantly strengthens evidentiary standards in medical-neglect cases and procedural protections for parents in child welfare proceedings.