Articles Posted in Adoption

There are many ways to grow a family, including adoption. In some instances, a child’s birth family will want to retain contact with a child and will request an open adoption. Usually, the open adoption contract will be made part of the order granting the adoption. If it is not, however, the court may see fit to amend the final adoption order, as illustrated in a recent California case. If you have questions regarding child custody or adoption, it is in your best interest to speak to a knowledgeable San Diego family law attorney about your options.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the two minor children were placed in the dependency system. They were then cared for by their paternal grandmother. The grandmother formally adopted both children but was having considerable difficulties caring for them. As such, she contacted an adoption agency and requested that the children be re-placed for adoption. She stipulated, though, that the children must continue to be a part of her family and that the adoptions must be open. Subsequently, the adoptive parents signed an open adoption contract.

Allegedly, after the court finalized the adoption, disagreements arose between the adoptive parents and the grandmother. The grandmother then discovered that the agreement had not been submitted to the adoption court and had not been considered or included in the original adoption order. As such, she filed a petition to amend the final judgment of adoption to include the agreement that was signed by the parties prior to the adoption. The Trial Court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction over the matter because the court that granted the adoptions failed to make the appropriate judicial decisions as to whether the post-adoption contact arrangement was entered into willingly and was in the best interests of the children. Therefore, it deemed the agreement invalid. The grandmother appealed. Continue reading

The child custody dispute between “Baby Veronica’s” biological father – who is part Cherokee — and her adoptive parents may finally be coming to a much-anticipated close. After the United States Supreme Court rendered its decision this past June, essentially restoring the young child to her adoptive family’s home, her biological father refused to cooperate and hand over the girl. Because of this, she remained in Oklahoma with the Cherokee Nation, who insisted that the child would remain with the tribe. However, just last week, yet another court heard the dispute. The Oklahoma Supreme Court dissolved a temporary court order leaving the child with her father and his family.

Unfortunately for parents, and especially for the children involved, child custody battles can be prolonged and bring out the worst in people. One would expect and hope that each parent is arguing over custody issues because they want to spend as much time as possible with their children. But at the core of these disputes, is typically an innocent child who simply wants the matter to be worked out, and as quickly as possible. The case mentioned above has been drawn out for two years, with the young child being moved around between families. If you are faced with a potential child custody dispute or issue of any kind, it is important to contact a local San Diego family law attorney as early in the proceedings as possible. An experienced attorney can help ease you through the process, protect your rights and try to achieve what would be in the best interests of your children.

In an earlier blog post, we reported on the facts of the case and the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling. Essentially, Baby Veronica was living with a family from her birth until she was 27 months old when her biological father was awarded custody based on the1978 Indian Child Welfare Act (federal law). The intent of the law was to make it more difficult for American Indian children to be taken from their families. The Court had to decide whether the law should be applied when it appeared to conflict with state law in South Carolina (where the custody dispute originated). The Court held that the federal law did not require the child to be returned to her father, finding that the statute did not apply to this case, since the Indian parent did not actually have custody of the child at any point in time.
Continue reading

Child custody disputes are as diverse as our society; there is no such thing as one size fits all. While some of the issues may be similar and familiar, each family brings to the table a unique set of facts and preconceived notions about how the proceedings will unfold. Add to the mix the fact that laws and court procedures vary from place to place, and the conflict may seem overwhelming. A dedicated family lawyer can help. If you are faced with a child custody issue, it is important to contact, as soon as possible, a San Diego family law attorney with extensive experience handling such matters.

In a recent case, the United States Supreme Court was asked to decide the familial fate of an American Indian child, who had been adopted by an American family when she just a baby. Prior to the girl’s birth, the biological father gave up his parental rights. The biological mother then allowed a couple from South Carolina to adopt the baby girl. Just four months after her birth, the biological father (an American Indian) had a change of heart and sought custody of the baby, asserting that he did not know that his former fiancée planned to put the child up for adoption.

The parents who were in the process of legally adopting the baby had been raising her for 27 months when the South Carolina courts ruled that the biological father could have custody of his daughter. For the last 18 months, the child (who is almost four years-old), has been living with her biological father. The state courts found that both families provided the girl with loving and safe homes. At issue in the case was the interplay between federal and state laws concerning parental rights. The question was whether the 1978 Indian Child Welfare Act (federal law) should be applied when it appeared to conflict with state law in South Carolina.

According to an article in the New York Times, the federal law’s aim is to make it more difficult for American Indian children to be taken from their families. If only South Carolina law applied to the case, the child would have remained with the adoptive parents, but that state’s courts ruled that the biological father’s parental rights under the federal law overrode state law.

In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court, however, concluded that the federal law did not require the child to be returned to her father, holding that the statute did not apply to this case, noting that the Indian parent did not have custody of the child at any point in time. Instead, at least one Justice indicated that the purpose of the law was to prevent the unwarranted removal of Indian children from their families. Here, the biological Indian parent never had custody of his daughter. The court found that the federal law was not meant to apply to a custody dispute where an Indian child’s adoption is lawfully and voluntarily initiated by a non-Indian parent with sole custody rights.

While this case did not emanate from the San Diego courts, the decision could still serve as precedent under similar facts in a California custody dispute. A local family law attorney can help parents with any custody issues they may be facing.
Continue reading