The Utah Supreme Court today put a temporary hold on a trial judge's orders to return a little girl to her soldier father after she was given up for adoption without his consent two years ago.
IMO there are some instances in which the mother -or custodial parent- has the right to give a child up for adoption after birth, in rape, if the other parent hasn't been around and has essentially abandoned the child, but this doesn't seem to be the issue in this scenario. To be honest, I'm a little surprised/confused as to how the mother was able to give the baby up for adoption if she was still married to the child's father? Isn't a woman's husband by default listed as a child's father, and thus automatically given parental rights? If so, how could she legally adopt out the child without the father having signed away his parental rights? This sounds like kidnapping through an adoption agency to me.
The inverse to this though, is that same-sex couples have had to fight FOR the rebuttable presumption to apply to them. So you end up with situations where two women are legally married and one is the bio mother and the other woman argues that she doesn't HAVE to adopt the child because by virtue of the fact that they're married, she's the presumed parent of the child.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Oh wow.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
I think I remember reading about similar cases.
Reply
Leave a comment