Background
In the early 2000s, the West Virginia Department of Human Services (DHS) obtained legal custody of C.R. after his biological parents’ rights were terminated. A Mingo County family subsequently adopted C.R. but later relinquished their parental rights following an incident in which C.R. allegedly choked a sibling, leading to a juvenile delinquency proceeding. While back in DHS custody and placed in a Fayette County group home, C.R. accumulated five psychiatric hospitalizations, multiple stays in group residential facilities, and a psychological evaluation documenting significant anger issues, inappropriate sexual behaviors, and self-harm.
Respondent parents L.R. and A.R. met C.R. through church activities and expressed interest in fostering and ultimately adopting him. Because they had two young children at home, they specifically asked their DHS caseworker and a Children’s Home Society social worker about C.R.’s past behavioral history. They allege they were told only of a single disciplinary infraction and diagnoses of bipolar disorder and depression — with no disclosure of his psychiatric hospitalizations, sexual behavioral history, or juvenile delinquency proceedings. The adoption was finalized in November 2019. The respondents allege that after the adoption, C.R. exhibited violent behavior and sexually abused their daughter, B.R. (C.R. denies these allegations and the associated charges were dismissed).
In January 2022, the respondents filed suit in Fayette County Circuit Court asserting negligence, misrepresentation, violation of West Virginia Code § 48-22-401, outrage, and constitutional claims. The circuit court dismissed the constitutional claims but allowed the remaining counts to proceed, rejecting the DHS’s qualified immunity defense at the motion-to-dismiss stage. The DHS then moved for summary judgment on immunity grounds; the circuit court denied that motion in March 2024, finding a mandatory, non-discretionary statutory disclosure duty that precluded qualified immunity. The DHS appealed.
The Court’s Holding
The Supreme Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s denial of summary judgment on both issues raised by the DHS. First, the court held that West Virginia Code § 48-22-401 imposes a non-discretionary, mandatory duty on the entity delivering a child for adoption — here, the DHS as C.R.’s legal custodian — to provide the child’s full “medical history” to prospective adoptive parents. Because the statute uses the word “shall,” the court applied settled West Virginia precedent that “shall” denotes a mandatory obligation affording the actor no discretion to refuse performance.
Second, the court held that the statutory term “medical history” encompasses behavioral and psychological history. Applying dictionary definitions, the court noted that “medical history” refers to “health history,” which in turn includes a patient’s “psychological, social, and sexual function.” The court further looked to a related adoption-registry statute, West Virginia Code § 48-23-207, which expressly defines “health history” to include “neonatal, psychological, physiological and medical care history.” Reading these provisions together under the in pari materia canon, the court concluded that the DHS was required to disclose C.R.’s psychiatric hospitalizations and behavioral history as part of his “medical history” under § 48-22-401.
Because the DHS’s disclosure duty was mandatory and non-discretionary, qualified immunity — which shields government officials only for discretionary acts — had no application to either the statutory violation claim or the negligence claim. The court expressly declined to decide whether the DHS actually complied with § 48-22-401, leaving that factual question for a jury to resolve at trial.
Key Takeaways
- Under West Virginia Code § 48-22-401, the legal custodian placing a child for adoption has a mandatory, non-discretionary duty — triggered by the word “shall” — to provide the prospective adoptive parents with the child’s complete medical history.
- “Medical history” in § 48-22-401 includes behavioral and psychological history; the DHS cannot limit its disclosure to diagnoses and medications while withholding psychiatric hospitalization records or documented behavioral concerns.
- Because qualified immunity protects only discretionary governmental conduct, it is unavailable as a defense to claims arising from a statutory mandate — meaning both the statutory-violation and negligence claims against the DHS may proceed to trial.
- The circuit court’s denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds was immediately appealable under the collateral-order doctrine, but the Supreme Court of Appeals reviewed the statutory interpretation questions de novo and found no error.
Why It Matters
This decision clarifies that West Virginia’s pre-adoption disclosure statute requires state agencies to share a child’s full behavioral and psychological record — not merely a narrow medical snapshot — with families before they finalize an adoption. Prospective adoptive parents who ask about a child’s history and receive incomplete information may have actionable claims in negligence and for statutory violation, and the state cannot deflect those claims with a qualified immunity defense when the underlying duty is statutory and mandatory.
For child welfare practitioners and adoption agencies operating in West Virginia, the ruling underscores that disclosure obligations under § 48-22-401 are not subject to caseworker discretion. Agencies should ensure that psychiatric records, juvenile history, and documented behavioral concerns are affirmatively disclosed to prospective adoptive families — particularly where, as here, those families have young children in the home and have specifically inquired about safety risks.