ADOPTION/Putative Father

November 12th, 2015

ALABAMA: D.W. v. J.W.B. The Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama affirmed, in part, and reversed, in part, the probate court’s judgement on partial findings denying appellant-father’s contest to the adoption of his child and reversed the probate court’s judgment granting the adoption of the child by appellees. Here, the child’s mother placed the child in appellees’ home for adoption after telling the father that the child had died during childbirth. When father found out that the child was in fact alive, he filed a motion to contest the adoption. The probate court found that father’s consent was not necessary and granted appellees’ adoption petition. On appeal, appellant-father first argued that his consent to the adoption was necessary because he and the child’s mother were in a common law marriage and, therefore, under Ala. Code § 26-10A-7(a)(3)(a) he was a presumed father. The appellate court disagreed, finding that the probate court received conflicting evidence regarding whether mother and appellant-father had entered into a common law marriage and, thus, did not err in finding there was not clear and convincing evidence to support father’s argument that they were married. Second, father argued that his due process rights were violated when the probate court refused to consider his objection to the adoption. The appellate court noted that under the Supreme Court of the United States and the Supreme Court of Alabama precedent, “the constitution protects an unwed father who has cultivated a substantial relationship with his child.” Here, the court found that there were disputes in the evidence presented as to whether appellant-father had cultivated a substantial relationship with his child, but because the probate court had rejected appellant’s constitutional arguments without determining whether he had grasped his rights, the case must be remanded back to the probate court for it to make that fact-sensitive determination.

Cite: No. 2140080; 2015 Ala. Civ. App. LEXIS 237 (Ala. Ct. App. Oct. 9, 2015)

Link to Full Opinion