Family law is a discipline that deals with family-related issues like child adoption and divorce. These issues are resolved by a family court system. Child adoption involves another person assuming parental responsibilities of another person who is not his/ her kin. All the child’s rights and responsibilities are permanently transferred from the original parents to the adopting parents. Baby Janikova was given for adoption by his mother without the consent of the biological father. This later brought controversy when the father knew the truth; he presents the case to the court and gets the custody of his son.
We will write a custom Critical Writing on “Family Law Fifth Edition” by William P. Statsky specifically for you
807 certified writers online
Baby Janikova’s biological mother erred in giving out the child for adoption without the consent of its biological father. The mother is to blame for denying the natural father of the boy his paternal rights. She lied to him that the baby died after birth. The trial court is also to blame for legalizing the adoption since the natural father had been told that the child died after birth. He was interested in having the child. After knowing the truth he took action to have the child back. The legal representation given to the Does by their attorney was poor. He helped the mother put the child for adoption without the consent of the natural father. The attorney made no efforts to find out the whereabouts of the natural father in spite of the natural mother declaring that she knew who the father was. The best interests of the child were found to be irrelevant by the court since the father’s parental interest had been improperly terminated. The attorney who helped the mother should have put more effort into finding the child’s natural father. Both biological parents should have been given a chance to give consent to the adoption. It was not appropriate for Daniella to marry Otakar in order to set adoption aside, even as he wanted to have the custody of his son back (Kirsch, 1994, p.2).
Greene had portrayed a bad picture of justice Heiple by implying that he was not just to the child. The journalist was just carrying out his usual duties of delivering information to the public and so justice Heiple did not have to attack him. It was only fair that the natural parents to get the child back but I do not agree with justice Heiple. The child had been brought up by his adopted parents. He was used to them and trusted them as his parents. The child would be traumatized when told to change his parental identity though they are his biological parents. The justice would have given the same ruling even though the child was to undergo insurmountable trauma; his interests were not in his favor. Paula can still challenge the illegal adoption of his son. Legal representatives should take time to find the validity of the form given by John’s father. Though he has custody of the child, consent of the natural mother is required when giving out the child for adoption. The court would nullify the adoption and have the child back to his mother or let her consent for the adoption of the child. Child adoption should be given consent by both natural parents. In ruling the validity of child adoption, the legal official should consider the interests of the child to avoid causing trauma to the child (Kirsch, 1994, p.2).
Kirsch, L. (1994). In re Petition of John Doe and Jane Doe to Adopt Baby Boy Janikova. Web.