Adoption of A.W.S. and K.R.S., 339 P.3d 414

Mother and Father had two children during their marriage; Father later married Stepmother, who sought to adopt the children.
Mother’s parenting time was reduced to supervised visits after a 2009 arrest; her last visit occurred in August 2010.
In November 2013 Stepmother filed adoption petitions seeking termination of Mother’s parental rights; Mother received notice and appeared pro se at the show‑cause hearing.
Mother did not have counsel and told the court she could not afford an attorney; she did not formally object to evidence or present her own evidence beyond brief testimony.
The District Court terminated Mother’s parental rights in January 2014, finding willful abandonment and that termination was in the children’s best interests under the Adoption Act.
Montana Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding Mother—if indigent—is entitled under Montana’s equal protection clause to appointed counsel in private adoption‑based termination proceedings and ordering a new hearing with counsel if she qualifies financially.

Issue	Mother’s Argument	Stepmother’s Argument	Held
Whether an indigent parent is entitled to appointed counsel in an involuntary termination of parental rights in a private adoption proceeding	Mother: Denial of counsel violated her constitutional rights; she indicated inability to afford an attorney	Stepmother: Mother waived the issue by not requesting counsel formally and had prior access to counsel in other matters	Court: Under Montana’s equal protection clause, similarly situated parents must be treated alike; indigent parents facing private termination under the Adoption Act must be afforded appointed counsel (if financially eligible) because no compelling tailoring justifies the disparity

Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (U.S. 2000) (parental custody is a fundamental liberty interest)
M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102 (U.S. 1996) (only the State can extinguish parent‑child legal relationship; private proceedings involve state action)
Lassiter v. Department of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18 (U.S. 1981) (indigent parent’s right to counsel under federal due process evaluated case‑by‑case; state pecuniary interest not dispositive)
Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333 (U.S. 1970) (remedial options when statute violates equal protection: invalidate or extend coverage)
Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (U.S. 1983) (state‑law ground adequate and independent; federal questions need not be decided)
In re K.A.S., 499 N.W.2d 558 (N.D. 1993) (adoption proceedings are not purely private; State exercises exclusive authority to terminate parentage)
In re L.T.M., 824 N.E.2d 221 (Ill. 2005) (similar analysis extending right to counsel in private termination proceedings)