1973, April, Pg. 9. Adoption: Beware the Unwed Father.

• Author: by Jack F. Smith

2 Colo.Law. 9

The Colorado Lawyer

1973.

1973, April, Pg. 9.

Adoption: Beware the Unwed Father

9Vol. 2, No. 6, Pg. 9Adoption: Beware the Unwed Fatherby Jack F. SmithThe primary concern in representing prospective adoptive parents is assuring your clients clear and unassailable "title" to the child they are adopting. This reference to real property terminology is not meant to be callous; perhaps no situation arising under the law is as heartbreaking as the contested adoption proceeding, and yet traditionally the law in other areas---such as real property---has been more certain than the law relating to human relationships. The adoption provisions of the Colorado Children's Code and subsequent amendments(fn1) have given Colorado one of the most comprehensive and workable statutory schemes relating to termination of parental rights, relinquishment, and adoption in the United States, and hopefully these carefully drafted statutes preclude the possibility of a contested adoption proceeding in Colorado."The primary purpose of adoption is to create new parent-child relationships which will establish a stable atmosphere in which children can grow and develop. Whenever possible society encourages the strengthening of family ties. When, in the interest of the child, it is necessary to sever natural parent-child relationships and establish new ones the law must specify clearly the rights and responsibilities of the adoptive parents, the natural parents, and the child, and safeguard the interests of each... The aim of the entire statute is to make certain as possible that once the adoption decree is issued no incident of prior misunderstanding or illegality can interrupt the new relationship and that the new relationship will be in the child's best interest."(fn2)

Stanley Makes Its AppearanceUnder Colorado law termination of the rights of the natural parents must precede the placement for adoption of the minor child. However, the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Stanley v. Illinois(fn3) has made the law relating to this termination unclear.

Appellant Peter Stanley had lived in Illinois with his common law wife, Joan, intermittently for eighteen years. During those years the couple had three children. There was no dispute as to Peter Stanley's paternity. However, Illinois law recognized neither common law marriage nor parental rights in the father of illegitimate children,

10and upon the death of the mother, Joan, the children were automatically presumed to be dependent and neglected and were declared wards of the State. Peter Stanley, upon petition, was denied a hearing on parental fitness because of his status as an unwed father, although Illinois statutes did provide for notice and a hearing on fitness where the State was seeking to terminate the parental rights of a father who was married to the children's mother. Stanley appealed the Illinois ruling to the United States Supreme Court, which upheld his claim: "Stanley's claim in the state courts and here is that...