Saturday, January 28, 2006
More on Fathers' Rights: OR LACK THEREOF!
Court: Unwed Father Can't Contest Adoption
RALEIGH, N.C. -- An unmarried father can't prevent his child's mother from putting their daughter up for adoption, the Supreme Court ruled Friday in reversing a lower court opinion.
Kristine Anderson gave birth to the girl on Jan. 6, 2003. She and the baby's father, Michael Avery, who had attended high school in Onslow County with Anderson, agreed about six months earlier to put the baby up for adoption. Avery withdrew his consent before the birth.
Days after their daughter was born, Avery was notified of Anderson's plan to allow the girl to be adopted. He challenged the pending adoption in court and lost.
The state Court of Appeals in 2004 reversed a trial court ruling requiring Avery's consent since he and his family had provided financial support for Anderson during the pregnancy.
The Supreme Court reversal stated that Avery "merely offered support but did not provide the actual financial support mandated."
"The consent of an unwed putative father ... is not obligatory unless he has assumed some of the burdens of parenthood," the Supreme Court ruled, ordering the trial court decision reinstated.
Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
RALEIGH, N.C. -- An unmarried father can't prevent his child's mother from putting their daughter up for adoption, the Supreme Court ruled Friday in reversing a lower court opinion.
Kristine Anderson gave birth to the girl on Jan. 6, 2003. She and the baby's father, Michael Avery, who had attended high school in Onslow County with Anderson, agreed about six months earlier to put the baby up for adoption. Avery withdrew his consent before the birth.
Days after their daughter was born, Avery was notified of Anderson's plan to allow the girl to be adopted. He challenged the pending adoption in court and lost.
The state Court of Appeals in 2004 reversed a trial court ruling requiring Avery's consent since he and his family had provided financial support for Anderson during the pregnancy.
The Supreme Court reversal stated that Avery "merely offered support but did not provide the actual financial support mandated."
"The consent of an unwed putative father ... is not obligatory unless he has assumed some of the burdens of parenthood," the Supreme Court ruled, ordering the trial court decision reinstated.
Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
# posted by Senior Mom @ 10:21 AM 
