In re Adoption of P.L.H. (Slip Opinion)
2017 Ohio 5824
| Ohio | 2017Background
- Putative father C.W. and birth mother S.C. had a sexual relationship in February 2015; S.C. became pregnant and decided to place the child for adoption with K.H. and P.H. (appellees).
- C.W. and S.C. exchanged periodic texts and two phone calls during the pregnancy but did not meet; communication included expressions of affection and some disagreement about adoption.
- S.C. filed to place the newborn with the appellees immediately after birth; appellees petitioned for adoption in Butler County Probate Court and S.C. consented.
- Probate court found C.W. did not consent but concluded his consent was unnecessary because he “willfully abandoned” the mother during pregnancy under R.C. 3107.07(B)(2)(c); the court rejected other statutory grounds and did not decide the appellees’ constitutional argument.
- The Twelfth District affirmed; this Court accepted review to resolve whether R.C. 3107.07(B)(2)(c) permits consideration of a putative father’s failure to care for and support the mother.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (C.W.) | Defendant's Argument (Appellees) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether R.C. 3107.07(B)(2)(c) allows considering a putative father’s failure to care for/support the mother in finding he "willfully abandoned" her | Statute’s plain text omits "care for and support"; (B)(2)(c) focuses solely on willful abandonment of the mother, so failure to support is irrelevant | Father’s lack of financial/emotional/physical support demonstrates abandonment and should be considered | Held for C.W.: (B)(2)(c) does not include "failed to care for and support"; those considerations apply under (B)(2)(b) (minor), not (c) (mother) |
| What the term "willfully abandoned" means | Requires focus on whether father voluntarily/ intentionally deserted, forsook, or abdicated all responsibility for the mother | Appellees urged broader inquiry including failure to provide support as probative of abandonment | Held: "Willfully abandoned" means voluntarily/intentionally deserting, forsaking, or abdicating all responsibility for the mother during pregnancy up to surrender/placement |
| Whether the record contains clear-and-convincing evidence that C.W. willfully abandoned the mother | C.W. argued his texts, calls, offer to pay medical expenses, notice of paternity, and other acts showed continued involvement and lack of willful abandonment | Appellees emphasized prolonged communication gaps and lack of financial support during pregnancy | Held: No clear-and-convincing evidence of willful abandonment; probate court’s finding was against the manifest weight of the evidence |
| Whether appellees may pursue other grounds or constitutional claims on appeal | C.W. argued those issues were resolved adversely below and appellees did not cross-appeal; appellees sought to raise constitutional right of birth mother | Appellees argued adoption without father's consent is necessary to vindicate mother’s right to place child | Held: Appellees lack standing to assert S.C.’s constitutional rights here; they did not cross-appeal other adverse findings, so no remaining basis to proceed without C.W.’s consent |
Key Cases Cited
- Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (discusses due-process and clear-and-convincing standard in termination/adoption contexts)
- In re Adoption of Masa, 23 Ohio St.3d 163 (Ohio application of clear-and-convincing proof and parental rights protections)
- In re Adoption of Holcomb, 18 Ohio St.3d 361 (burden on party invoking exception to parental-consent requirement)
- Belvedere Condominium Unit Owners’ Assn. v. R.E. Roark Cos., 67 Ohio St.3d 274 (considering unraised-but-implicit legal issues on appeal)
- In re Adoption of Schoeppner, 46 Ohio St.2d 21 (strict construction of adoption-consent exceptions)
- Lang v. Dir., Dept. of Job & Family Servs., 134 Ohio St.3d 296 (de novo review for statutory construction)
- State ex rel. Data Trace Information Servs., L.L.C. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Fiscal Officer, 131 Ohio St.3d 255 (use of common-word definitions when statutes lack definitions)