Natasha was born with FAS. The court holds that the mother is guilty of neglect, even though the mother has never had custody of the child. Natasha was born with severe medical problems, and at all times was in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit of the hospital. Her mother continued to drink, and the court concluded the mother would be unable to deal safely with the child's precarious physical condition.

The plaintiff agency (unidentified) offered expert testimony that FAS can be caused "either by episodic binge drinking or the regular intake of 2 or 3 ounces of alcohol per day." 146 Misc. 2d at 3. The mother testified she drank 4 ounces every other day while pregnant. 146 Misc. 2d at 6. [Is this 2, 3 or 4 ounces of beer, or whiskey, or the net ounces of pure alcohol in the drinks? The opinion is unclear.]

The mother had been warned that drinking might harm the baby and her own liver; her response was to cut down rather than to totally stop drinking. She explained: "I tried to stop drinking alcohol completely and it couldn't be done . . . . Because its hard . . . . Hard to stop drinking just like that." 146 Misc. 2d at 7.

The court reasoned that because of the severity of the child's medical condition, the child would be in danger if the mother drank. It then concluded that the fact she drank during the pregnancy was evidence she would do so later.

146 Misc. 2d at 7. This assumption of continuity of alcohol use seems inconsistent with Morris v. Dept. of Social and Health Services, 2003 WL 220958 (Wash. App. Div. 1) and with some cases regarding ineffectiveness of counsel, which assert that knowledge that a mother drank (even excessively) at some point in her life is not sufficient to give counsel reason to believe she might have drunk during her pregnancy.