Introduction
This was the case filed by Joseph B in the court of Appeals to veto the adoption of his daughter Annette. Annette B. is a girl who was born in August 1991. She was born to Marissa R. and Joseph B. who were not married. She lived with her mother until 1996 in Central Islip. During this time, her father alleged he visited her every weekend. In 1996, Annette and her mother moved from Central Islip. On the other hand, her father Joseph was arrested for a drug offense and was in prison until 2001 when this case was heard. During the trial, Joseph admitted that he did not have any contact with Annette. However, he claimed he had made three attempts to find her but he did not provide any proof of his attempts. His claim was uncorroborated by any person or document. Thus, there was no evidence to support his case for not abandoning Annette. He tried to defend himself by saying that the Department of Social Services (DSS) did not inform him of the whereabouts of his time during his incarceration. In August 2001, the DSS gave Joseph a notice about Annette when the DSS file a petition to terminate Joseph’s parental rights on the grounds of abandonment.
The court of appeal upheld the Family Courts’ decision to terminate Joseph’s parental rights because there was enough evidence to prove that he had abandoned Annette and his uncorroborated testimony about his attempt to contact her. This paper will endeavor to look at the outcome of the case supposing that Annette was not in foster care, but was in a group home or that Annette’s foster parents were not seeking to adopt her. In addition, this discussion will find out whether the contemporary state of the child should be taken into account when the legal framework is apparent and compelling proof of neglect by their natural parent.
Foster care
Annette was placed in foster care because her birth mother terminated her parental rights. On the other hand, her unwed father abandoned her when he was arrested for a drug offense and put into incarceration. Foster families care for children under their care (Foster Care, 2009, Placing Children in Foster Care, para.1). Annette had been in foster care for more than two years and the father had not attempted reunification with his daughter (Katz, p.147). In case of adoption, the court would give the first priority to the foster family if they wished to adopt a child under their care. If Annette were not in foster care perhaps, the court would have put Joseph’s claim that he had attempted to contact his daughter three times into consideration and reversed the Family Court’s ruling. This is because a parent may not have money to support a child but “won’t be considered to have abandoned your child as long you visit regularly” or contact a child (Warner, Ihara &Hertz, 2008, p. 122). This is because the law recognizes unmarried biological fathers (Oliphant & Steegh, 2007, p. 328; Lerman & Ooms, 1994, p.142; Brandes & Weidman, 1996, p. 1; U.S. Supreme Court, 2009, p.1; Narayan & Bartkowiak, 1999, p. 40). On the other hand, the court had to consider if Joseph was a fit parent which he was not meaning the results would have been the same even if Annette was not in foster care. Joseph’s opposition to the free adoption of his daughter cannot succeed because his parental rights were terminated legally (Cornick, 1995, p. 317).
Annette’s Legal circumstances
There is no point to mull over the preferring position of the child because the evidence of the child abandonment is evident. Joseph abandoned his child and he has had no contact with Annette since she was four years. Therefore, he gave up his parental rights through neglect. The law calls such practice abandonment. He has no grounds to stop Annette from being put up for adoption because he does not have a relationship with her. Thus, the court does not have a reason to look into the current situation of the child concerning abandonment. It is clear that Annette has no natural parent who is responsible for her. Joseph’s failure to contact Annette even after finding out she was in foster care is sufficient evidence that he did not make adequate attempts to contact her. The court will be acting right because it can adopt “a clear and convincing proof standard for parental status termination cases” (Marby & Kelly, 2006, p. 88). Joseph has not been supporting his child and thus he cannot claim he will start doing so now because he even failed to make an effort to contact her in foster care. He failed to protect his right to veto adoption by taking the necessary measure such as keeping contact or supporting Annette (Smith, 2004, p.1).
Conclusion
The court gave a fair ruling that Joseph abandoned his child. He is an irresponsible parent who wants to stop his daughter from being adopted. Adoption would be a better option for his child so that she can get permanency in her life if she is lucky to get an adoptive family. Annette will be better without her father who not only failed to support her but contact her.
Reference List
Brandes, R.J. & Weidman, L.C. (1996). The Rights of Unwed Fathers. Web.
Cornick, S.M. (1995). A practical guide to family law. New York: engage Learning. ISBN0314044515.
Feld, B (2003) Juvenile Justice Administration in a Nutshell, 2d Edition. St. Paul: Thomson West. (ISBN: 978-0-314-18138-1).
Foster Care and Adoption for Waiting Children. Web.
Katz, N.S. (2003). Family law in America. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN0199264341.
Lerman, I.R. & Ooms, T. (1994). Young Unwed Fathers: Changing Roles and Emerging Policies. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. ISBN1566393183, 9781566393188.
Marby, R.C. & Kelly, L. (2006). Adoption law: theory, policy and practice. :New Jersey: Wm. S. Hein Publishing. ISBN0837734487, 9780837734484.
Narayan, U. & Bartkowiak, J.J. (1999). Having and raising children: unconventional families, hard choices, and the social good. Penn State Press. ISBN0271018879, 9780271018874.
Oliphant, R, & Ver Steegh, N (2007). Family Law, 2d Edition. New York: Aspen. (ISBN: 978-0-7355-6289-9.
Smith, E.L. (2004). Unwed Fathers: Preventing Your Infant Child from Being Adopted without Your Consent. Web.
U.S. Supreme Court. (2009). Web.
Warner, R., Ihara, L.T. & Hertz, F. (2008). Living Together: A Legal Guide for Unmarried Couples. 14th ed. California: Nolo. SBN1413307558, 9781413307559.