204 So. 3d 386
Ala. Civ. App.2016Background
- Child born 2003; parents divorced 2004 with mother granted physical custody and father visitation; father ordered to pay child support.
- Mother married the stepfather in 2005; child lived with mother and stepfather thereafter.
- Stepfather petitioned to adopt the child in March 2015; he alleged the father had abandoned the child and failed to maintain a significant parental relationship for over six months.
- Father opposed the adoption, admitting he stopped regular contact around late 2012–early 2013 due to work, financial problems, and conflict with the mother but continued paying court-ordered support and asserted he wanted to parent the child.
- Probate court found by clear and convincing evidence that the father ceased contact and failed to maintain a significant parental relationship for six months, and that his consent was implied; it granted the adoption.
- On appeal the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed, holding the record lacked clear and convincing evidence of implied consent or abandonment and remanded with instructions to dismiss the adoption.
Issues
| Issue | Father’s Argument | Stepfather’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the father’s conduct constituted clear and convincing evidence of implied consent to adoption under Ala. Code § 26-10A-9(a) | Father argued his noncontact resulted from work/financial constraints and parental conflict, he consistently paid child support, and he never intended to relinquish parental rights | Stepfather argued father abandoned/left the child without communication or support and failed to maintain a significant parental relationship for the statutory six-month period | Court held the evidence did not rise to clear and convincing proof of implied consent or abandonment; reversal and dismissal of adoption proceedings required |
Key Cases Cited
- Ex parte A.M.P., 997 So.2d 1008 (Ala. 2008) (consent is foundational to adoption; statutes strictly construed)
- K.L.B. v. W.M.F., 864 So.2d 333 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002) (existence of statutory factors does not automatically establish implied consent)
- Schwaiger v. Headrick, 281 Ala. 392 (Ala. 1967) (father’s temporary cessation of visits/support did not necessarily show intent to relinquish parental rights)
- Butler v. Giles, 47 Ala. App. 543 (Ala. Civ. App. 1972) (fact-specific inquiry into whether parental omissions demonstrate settled purpose to abandon)
- S.A. v. M.T.O., 143 So.3d 799 (Ala. Civ. App. 2013) (statutory consent requirements and clear-and-convincing standard reaffirmed)
- L.M. v. D.D.F., 840 So.2d 171 (Ala. Civ. App. 2002) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)
- McGowen v. Smith, 264 Ala. 303 (Ala. 1953) (historic principle that adoption statutes displace natural parental rights and must be strictly complied with)