OUJI-CR 4-37

NEGLECT OF CHILD - ELEMENTS

No person may be convicted of neglect of a child unless the State has proved beyond a reasonable doubt each element of the crime. These elements are:

First, a person responsible for the child's health, safety, or welfare;

Second, willfully/maliciously;

[Third, failed/omitted to provide;

Fourth, [adequate (nurturance and affection)/food/clothing/shelter/ sanitation/hygiene)/(appropriate education)]/(medical/dental/(behavioral health) care/ [supervision/(appropriate caretakers) to protect the child from harm/(threatened harm) of which any reasonable and prudent person responsible for the child's health, safety or welfare would be aware]/(special care made necessary for the child's health and safety by the physical/mental condition of the child);

Fifth, for a child under the age of eighteen.]

OR

[Third, failed/omitted to protect;

Fourth, a child under the age of eighteen from exposure to;

 

Fifth, (the use/possession/sale/manufacture of illegal drugs)/(illegal activities)/(sexual acts or materials that are not age-appropriate).]

OR

[Third, abandoned;

Fourth, a child under the age of eighteen.]

______________________________

Statutory Authority: 21 O.S. 2021, § 843.5(C), (O)(2), 10A O.S. 2021, § 1-1-105(49).

 

Notes on Use

Activities that might not constitute neglect are set out in OUJI-CR 4-35B, supra, and 4-37A, infra

Committee Comments

The crime of omission to provide for a child is governed by 21 O.S. 2021, § 852(A). See OUJI-CR 4-40A, infra. Its elements are similar to the elements for child neglect, but in contrast to child neglect, omission to provide for a child is a misdemeanor. Unlike child neglect, omission to provide for a child includes willful omission to furnish monetary child support or the payment of court-ordered day care or medical insurance costs.

In Fairchild v. State, 1999 OK CR 49, ¶ 51, 998 P.2d 611, 622-23, the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals decided that the mens rea for felony murder of a child under 21 O.S. Supp. 1999, § 701.7(C) was a general intent to commit the act which causes the injury, rather than a specific intent, and that the general intent was included within the terms "willfully" or "maliciously."

 

Possession of medical marijuana that is authorized under 63 O.S. Supp. 2025, § 420(A) and (K) is not unlawful.  State v. Aguilar, 2024 OK CR 18, ¶ 6, ___ P.3d ___ (“[A]n expectant mother's licensed possession and use of medical marijuana would not trigger an automatic finding of neglect for failure to protect her unborn child from exposure to illegal drugs because as to her, marijuana is not an illegal drug.”).    See also 63 O.S. Supp. 2025, § 425(D) ("[T]here is no presumption of neglect or child endangerment for conduct allowed under [63 O.S. Supp. 2024, § 420, et seq.], unless the behavior of the person creates an unreasonable danger to the safety of the minor child.").

(2026 Supp.)