[i]nstead of remanding the case to the Circuit Court for appropriate conclusions of law based on the statutory definition of "dependent and neglected child," we deem it prudent to look at the facts as found by the Circuit Court and determine whether they amount to clear and convincing evidence that Son is a dependent and neglected child under any subsection of Tennessee Code Annotated § 37-1-102(b)(12).In re K.A.P., No. W2012-00281-COA-R3-JV, 2013 WL 6665012, at *8 (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2013). The definition of a dependent and neglected child has been renumbered to subsection (13) since the decision in In re K.A.P.

In doing so, we presume that the evidence supported the Trial Court’s findings of fact. See In re K.A.P., No. W2012-00281-COA-R3-JV, 2013 WL 6665012, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2013) ("Where the appellant fails to prepare an adequate appellate record, we are unable to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies as to the trial court’s findings of fact and have no choice but to assume that the record, had it been preserved and provided to us, would have contained sufficient evidence to support those factual findings.") [13] In contesting the Trial Court’s determination that Mother proved that a material change in circumstance had occurred, Father has argued:

In doing so, we presume that the evidence supported the Trial Court's findings of fact. See In re K.A.P., No. W2012-00281-COA-R3-JV, 2013 WL 6665012, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2013) ("Where the appellant fails to prepare an adequate appellate record, we are unable to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies as to the trial court's findings of fact and have no choice but to assume that the record, had it been preserved and provided to us, would have contained sufficient evidence to support those factual findings.")

Cases where it was unclear if the child had even been exposed to a parent's fairly isolated marijuana use are simply not relevant to our analysis. See, e.g., In re K.A.P., No. W2012-00281-COA-R3-JV, 2013 WL 6665012, at *7 (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2013) (reversing an order of dependency and neglect because the record did not reveal whether the child was present when the mother was using marijuana and the mother had been passing drug screens by the time of the de novo hearing). But prenatal drug use to the point where the child tests positive for the substance at birth is exposure of the child to drugs.

Moreover, we determine that the trial court properly considered Mother's situation at the time of trial as well as the record as a whole. See generally In re K.A.P., No. W2012-00281-COA-R3-JV, 2013 WL 6665012, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2013) ("Tennessee Code Annotated § 37-1-159 directs the circuit court to conduct its own de novo trial, but also permits it to consider the juvenile court record."). Second, Mother asserts that the trial court improperly "relied heavily on the fact that the Mother was the victim of an assault in December of 2019."

Therefore, the circuit court was authorized to consider "the entire Juvenile Court record . . . in addition to the evidence submitted in the de novo trial." In re Isaiah L., 340 S.W.3d 692, 707-08 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2010); see also In re K.A.P., No. W2012-00281-COA-R3-JV, 2013 WL 6665012, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2013) ("Tennessee Code Annotated § 37-1-159 directs the circuit court to conduct its own de novo trial, but also permits it to consider the juvenile court record"). As for the admission of the transcripts from the juvenile court proceedings, the admission or exclusion of evidence is a discretionary decision.

Id. While the circuit court in a dependency and neglect proceeding is permitted to consider the juvenile record, it may not rely solely on the record made before the juvenile court. In re K.A.P., No. W2012-00281-COA-R3JV, 2013 WL 6665012, at *6 (Tenn. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2013). Instead, Tennessee Code Annotated Section 37-1-159(c) provides that the circuit court must try the case de novo by hearing witnesses again and by rendering an independent decision based on the evidence received in the circuit court proceeding.