In the Matter of the Adoption of C.O., Minor Child, J.O. v. J.W. (mem. dec.)
82A01-1703-AD-643
| Ind. Ct. App. | Oct 18, 2017Background
- Marriage of Mother and Father dissolved; Child C.O. born Sept 2012; Mother sole custody with Father parenting time per dissolution decree.
- Stepparent Stepfather filed Petition for Adoption in Aug 2016; Father contested seeking to preserve parental rights.
- Agreed Order of Modification (April 2015) reduced Father’s parenting time to four hours weekly; tax exemption shifted to Mother.
- Mother alleged Father abandoned/not communicated and failed to support; Stepfather alleged best interests favored adoption.
- Trial court granted adoption; found Father’s consent unnecessary under Indiana Code 31-19-9-8; Father appealed.
- Record showed Father’s contact with Child was irregular; Mother limited contact due to safety concerns and alcohol issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Father's consent was properly dispensed with under 31-19-9-8 | Stepfather | Father's consent required | Not supported by clear and convincing evidence |
| Whether Stepfather proved lack of communication for one year | Stepfather | Father communicated and attempted contact | Stepfather failed to prove significant lack of communication |
| Whether Stepfather proved failure to provide support within one year | Stepfather | Father provided some support; not enough to prove failure | Stepfather failed to prove failure to provide support within year |
| Best interests considerations/impact on Child | Adoption serves Child’s best interests | Adoption disrupts parent-child bond | Court reversed due to lack of statutory proof; remanded to reinstate parental rights |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adoption of C.E.N., 847 N.E.2d 267 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (significant communication required, not token efforts)
- In re Adoption of D.C., 928 N.E.2d 602 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (consent dispensed if failed to communicate or provide support for period)
- In re Adoption of M.B., 944 N.E.2d 73 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011) (burden on petitioner to prove statutory criteria clear and convincing)
- In re Adoption of M.A.S., 815 N.E.2d 216 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004) (duty to support exists independent of court order; nonmonetary contributions count)
- In re Adoption of H.N.P.G., 878 N.E.2d 900 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (strictly construed statutes; best interests paramount)
- T.W., 859 N.E.2d 1215 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (preference against parent thwarting communication; examine actions to facilitate contact)
- E.W. v. J.W., 20 N.E.3d 889 (Ind. Ct. App. 2014) (nonmonetary support counted as parental contribution)
- McElvain v. Hite, 800 N.E.2d 947 (Ind. Ct. App. 2003) (reversal when record shows minimal contact within year)