Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 48.133 (2026)
Jurisdiction over unborn children in need of protection or services and the expectant mothers of those unborn children
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
48.13348.133 Jurisdiction over unborn children in need of protection or services and the expectant mothers of those unborn children. The court has exclusive original jurisdiction over an unborn child alleged to be in need of protection or services which can be ordered by the court whose expectant mother habitually lacks self-control in the use of alcohol beverages, controlled substances or controlled substance analogs, exhibited to a severe degree, to the extent that there is a substantial risk that the physical health of the unborn child, and of the child when born, will be seriously affected or endangered unless the expectant mother receives prompt and adequate treatment for that habitual lack of self-control. The court also has exclusive original jurisdiction over the expectant mother of an unborn child described in this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2004–2025 · leading case: Steven v. v. Kelley H., 2004 WI 47 (Wis. 2004).
Steven v. v. Kelley H., 2004 WI 47 (Wis. 2004). “13 are proved by clear and convincing evidence; (2) to determine if the allegations in a petition for unborn children alleged to be in need of protection or services under Wis. Stat. § 48.133 are proved by clear and convincing evidence; and (3) to determine if the allegations in…”
Loertscher v. Anderson, 893 F.3d 386 (7th Cir. 2018). “The court concluded that the provision of Act 292 that brings expectant mothers under the jurisdiction of the juvenile courts, Wis. Stat. § 48.133 , was void for vagueness.”
Loertscher v. Anderson, 259 F. Supp. 3d 902 (W.D. Wis. 2017). “” Wis. Stat. § 48.133 . The Act extends various aspects of the Children’s Code to unborn, children in need of protection or services; the court will highlight a few.”
Brown Cnty. Human Servs. v. T. F. (Wis. Ct. App. 2020). “13(3m), § 48.133, and § 48.415(2)). For these grounds, which contain an element that is predictive in nature (e.”
Columbia Cnty. DH&HS v. S. A. J. (Wis. Ct. App. 2024). “§ 48.133. In June 2018, S.A.J. gave birth to her daughter K.”
S. G. v. Wisconsin Dep't of Child. & Families (Wis. Ct. App. 2025). “§§ 48.133, 48.977, and 48.9795. 10 No. 2024AP472 arises often, making a definitive decision necessary to guide circuit courts; (4) the issue is likely to arise again and needs to be resolved to avoid uncertainty; or (5) the issue is ‘likely of repetition and evades review.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.