AS and DS v. CZ - State of Indiana

More documents

Recommendations

Info

which held that a parent’s duty to support a minor child can be defined in nonmonetary terms. As such, Mother references the trips they made and the gifts she purchased. While we agree with Mother’s interpretation of In re N.W., we find the case not dispositive in the instant situation. In N.W., mother was not subject to a judicial decree to pay child support; in fact, the trial court explicitly concluded that mother had a negative child support obligation. Id. As a result, we determined that “even though no court order to pay child support may exist, [m]other still had a duty to support N.W. However, because the trial court already determined that [m]other’s child support is negative, this ‘duty of support’ might be defined in nonmonetary terms.” Id. To the contrary, here, Mother was subject to and found to be in contempt of a monetary child support order. Nevertheless, we are mindful that a petition for adoption is not automatically granted following a showing that a natural parent failed to provide support when able to do so. Once the statutory requirements are met, the court may then look to the arrangement which will be in the best interest of the child. Id. The purpose of Indiana’s adoption statutes is to protect and promote the welfare of children by providing them with stable family units. Id. On occasion we have observed that the relationship between parent and child is a bundle of human rights of such fundamental importance that adoption statutes, being in derogation of the common law, should be strictly construed in favor of a worthy parent and the preservation of such relationship. Id. at 914-15. However, in evaluating the parent-child relationship, the best interest of the child is paramount and our main concern should lie with the effect of the adoption on the reality of the minor child’s life. Id. at 915. 8
During the instant proceedings, the parties and the trial court focused on the statutory requirements to waive Mother’s consent to the adoption of K.S. by Step- Mother. Specifically, the trial court noted on the record “the only issue today is consent. [] so, we’ll solve that today and then decide where we go from there.” (Transcript p. 4) The parties did not present any evidence with regard to the impact of the adoption on K.S.’s life and whether the severance of her ties with Mother would be in K.S.’s best interest. Therefore, we remand to the trial court to determine whether the adoption will be in K.S.’s best interest. See I.C. § 31-19-11-1(a). CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, we conclude that Mother’s consent to the adoption of her minor child by Stepmother was not required. However, we remand for further proceedings to determine whether the adoption is in K.S.’s best interest. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. BAILEY, J. and CRONE, J. concur 9
Page 1 and 2: FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELL
Page 3 and 4: From January to November 2010, Moth
Page 5 and 6: others, and under carefully enumera
Page 7: Here, the record reflects that Moth

AS and DS v. CZ - State of Indiana

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?