Showing posts with label biological father's rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label biological father's rights. Show all posts

Friday, August 17, 2012

Proposed bill would penalize adoption agencies for fraudulent representations

Proposed bill would penalize adoption agencies for fraudulent representations

Published: Wednesday, Aug. 15 2012 7:58 p.m. MDT
SALT LAKE CITY — As state lawmakers consider possible amendments to the state adoption laws, one Utah man could learn as early as Thursday whether he can intervene in the adoption of his now 2-year-old son.
The adoption occurred without his knowledge or consent, despite his repeated representations to the birth mother of his intentions to co-parent the child, said attorney Wes Hutchins.
On Wednesday, the Utah Legislature's Health and Human Services Committee, saw photographs of the man and an obviously pregnant woman who was carrying the man's child, Hutchins said.
The woman is depicted in photographs touring Temple Square with the biological father and his family on Dec. 29, 2009. The following day, the baby was born, unbeknownst to the biological father, Jake Strickland. Just over 24 hours later, the birth mother signed documents relinquishing her parental rights.
Strickland had been told by the birth mother that the baby would be delivered by C-section on Jan. 12, 2010, Hutchins said.
On Jan. 5, 2010, however, the woman told Strickland in a cell phone conversation that she had placed the baby with an adoptive couple, he said.
Strickland initiated a paternity claim the following day. He had not, however, registered with Utah's putative father registry during the pregnancy.
Strickland later learned that the woman was not legally divorced from her husband, according to press reports. Under the state Judicial Code, a married woman's husband is presumed to be the father of her child.
Strickland and his family have been engaged in a legal fight over the adoption for more than two years. Second District Court Judge David Hamilton could rule on the case as early as Thursday, said Strickland's mother, Jenny Graham.
Hutchins, a family law attorney now representing Strickland, told the legislative committee that many pregnant young women from other states come to Utah to place their babies for adoption because Utah law has weak protections for biological fathers.
Hutchins told lawmakers that some agencies even "coach" birth mothers what to tell biological fathers who inquire about the child's birth or their rights.
Among western states, few have as many paternal rights cases that go up to appellate courts, which suggest problems with Utah's laws, he said.
Rep. Dan McCay, R-Riverton, who is also an attorney, said it could also be construed that Utah's higher courts are more amenable to hearing such cases.
To that end, Rep. Christine Watkins, D-Price, has developed a legislative proposal to further regulate the activities of adoption agencies.
A draft discussed by state lawmakers Wednesday contemplates sanctions for adoption agencies or employees of such agencies who make fraudulent representations in connection with adoptions.
Agency licenses could be suspended, even revoked, according to the proposal. The proposal also includes a provision in which a party that challenges a fraudulent representation in connection with an adoption and prevails, can be awarded attorney fees and costs.
Under the proposed legislation, notice of an adoption must be provided to an unmarried biological father of a child six months old or younger.
McCay said that portion of the draft legislation raised concerns because adoptive parents need to know that an adoption, when finalized, is final.
"I think there is some value to the finality and getting the kid out of the middle of a fight," McCay said.
Hutchins, who told lawmakers that he has worked in family law for two decades, agreed that parents need that assurance.
He said he believes the attorney fees provision of the draft legislation would persuade any party against making false representations that could disrupt a placement.
Watkins asked the committee to take time to study the proposal and allow her to make further refinements before the interim committee takes any action.

Wednesday, March 21, 2012

One step closer for Rob!





Full Story
Colorado father’s custody fight moves back to his home state

Adoption • It’s the next step in precedent-setting case.


image
Paul Fraughton | The Salt Lake Tribune Rob Manzanares and his mother, Elizabeth, stand next to their attorney Jennifer Reyes, right, after a Wednesday hearing on the custody of Rob Manzanares' daughter, given up at birth without his consent.

A birth father’s four-year battle for custody of his daughter will now move to a Colorado court after a Utah judge agreed Wednesday to dismiss the child’s adoption.

Third District Judge Paul Maughan said he wants to review the landmark Utah Supreme Court ruling that sent Colorado resident Rob Manzanares’ case back to the lower court but, barring any obstacles, will sign an order dismissing the adoption, which had not been finalized. That will allow a Colorado court to fully take over the dispute. Maughan also ordered that Manzanares’ name be added to his daughter’s birth certificate.

Manzanares, who has fought for his right to parent his daughter since before her birth in 2008, broke down in tears outside the courtroom at the prospect of soon being reunited with her.

“It’s just a step closer to getting to see my girl I’ve been fighting for for so long and I just can’t wait to hold her and bring her home where she belongs, with her family,” said Manzanares of his daughter, who will remain with her prospective adoptive parents for now.

While the Colorado judge has agreed to put the case on a fast track, Manzanares still has a legal fight ahead of him.

The child’s adoptive parents, relatives of the birth mother, have asked the Colorado judge to terminate Manzanares’ parental rights. Carie Terry, the birth mother, also has filed a conditional motion requesting that her parental rights be terminated in Colorado but only after Manzanares’ rights are terminated. Terry’s rights were already terminated in Utah as part of the adoption proceeding here.

Despite that, Manzanares is optimistic the end line is near.

“I believe Colorado will do what’s right and make a determination of the best interests of my daughter,” he said. “No other father should have to go through this and, more importantly, no child should have to go through this. I’ve been asked by many fathers for help and assistance. My biggest thing for them is just be very patient and don’t give up hope and keep fighting and do it in a peaceful manner.”

Attorney Larry Jenkins, who represents the prospective adoptive parents, and attorney David Harding, who represents the birth mother, declined comment after the hearing. The prospective adoptive father also declined comment.

But the tension between the parties was evident as they filed into the courtroom for the hearing when the prospective adoptive father attempted to push Manzanares on the shoulder — but ended up pushing Elizabeth Manzanares, his mother — and called him a “perjurer.”

“I don’t know why,” Manzanares said. “He’s a little upset with me. I have no hard feelings. I hope nothing but the best for them. I just want my daughter back and I’m willing to whatever I can and whatever I need to do to get her back into my arms.”

In a split decision, the Utah Supreme Court ruled in January that Manzanares was improperly denied a say in his daughter’s adoption, with the majority finding he could not have known Terry planned to give birth and place the baby for adoption in Utah due to numerous misleading and false statements she made about her intentions.

In fact, Terry stated in a court filing in a paternity action Manzanares filed in Colorado before the baby’s birth that she had no such plan. Terry gave birth in Utah on Feb. 17, 2008, and appeared in 3rd District Court three days later to relinquish her parental rights; she informed the Colorado court that same day she could not attend a hearing because she was still in Utah visiting a sick relative.

In a subsequent hearing, a Utah judge found Terry had deliberately deceived him and concealed relevant information from judges in Utah and Colorado but allowed the adoption to proceed after ruling that Manzanares had not acted in time to protect his rights under Utah’s stringent statutory deadlines.

In its decision the Utah Supreme Court said it was returning the case to the lower court to determine whether Manzanares met Colorado requirements for establishing paternal rights and shown a full commitment to his parental responsibilities — questions the Colorado court will now decide.

The decision spotlighted problems birth fathers face in Utah and offers some direction for lower court judges, said Jennifer Reyes, Manzanares’ Utah attorney.

“I believe that birth fathers who are willing to step up to the plate and parent their children should be given an opportunity,” Reyes said after Wednesday’s hearing. “Before she was even born, he was saying to everyone, ‘Hello, I’m here, I want to have custody of my daughter, I want to take care of her, I want to love her.’”

Other biological fathers are carefully watching what happens in the case. Jake Strickland, who lives in South Jordan, and Bobby Nevares of Colorado, who also are contesting adoption of their biological children, gathered outside the courtroom Wednesday to support Manzanares.

“It’s not fair that he would have to come here and be by himself when there are so many other guys who are going through the same thing,” said Strickland, who has renewed his effort to intervene in the adoption of his son, born in 2010.

Added Nevares, whose son was also born in 2010 and placed for adoption in Utah: “It’s not just a one-man fight. Showing our support to him gives him the courage to keep going with it. It gives me a lot of hope to see that somebody is going to keep going as far as he has gone.”

brooke@sltrib.com


© 2012 The Salt Lake Tribune



http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=19678850

Sunday, January 29, 2012

This is amazing!




Utah adoption bill aims to give unwed fathers more protections

Legislation • Mothers required to give notice of intent by mail or publication.


A state lawmaker has introduced a bill aimed at preventing an unmarried woman from coming to Utah to give birth and pursue adoption without informing the biological father of her plan, a problem highlighted in a Friday Utah Supreme Court ruling involving an unmarried Colorado father.

House Bill 308, sponsored by Rep. Christine Watkins, D-Price, would require pregnant women to give notice by mail or publication to out-of-state unmarried fathers if they plan to give birth and place infants for adoption in Utah.

Watkins’ proposed bill also simplifies the process an unwed father must follow to initially protect his rights, eliminating the requirement that he initiate a court action before he can file a notice of intent to claim paternity with the state’s putative father registry. That change would apply to Utah residents as well as unwed fathers who reside elsewhere.

The bill would require a notice to be sent to the unmarried father’s last known residence or published in a newspaper where he was last known to reside that informs him of an adoption plan and what he needs to do to protect his rights. It sets a deadline of 30 days for the father to act once he receives the notice or the mother gives consent or relinquishes the baby.

An unwed father who files a paternity notice with the state registry would then have an additional 30 days to begin a court paternity action and file other declarations about his interest in assuming custody and caring for the child. If the unmarried father does not respond, his consent to the adoption would be assumed, the bill says.

“I am very sympathetic to fathers loving their children,” said Watkins, who has two brothers and four sons. “A lot of fathers don’t want to give up on their children. I thought, ‘You know, let’s give these guys a chance.’”

Utah’s current law says that once a birth mother consents to an adoption or relinquishes her child, that decision may not be revoked. Watkins’ proposed bill changes that, too. If a biological father successfully asserts his parental rights, a birth mother would have 30 days to then revoke her consent to the adoption.

Two Utah attorneys said the legislation was a “step in the right direction.”

“The state obviously needs a means to facilitate adoptions of out-of-state children but the current system is ripe for abuse,” said Joshua Peterman, an attorney for a Florida father whose effort to intervene in his daughter’s adoption is currently pending before the Utah Supreme Court.

Wes Hutchins, who is an adoption attorney and an adoptive father, consulted on Watkins’ bill. He is also president of the Utah Adoption Council but spoke independently of that organization on Friday.

He said the Utah Supreme Court’s rulingrequiring a rehearing in the case of Colorado father Robert Manzanares “lends considerable support for positive change in this area of the law,” including changes proposed by Watkins that are “designed to prevent birth mothers from forum shopping Utah just to cut bio dads out of the parenting picture.”

The justices determined Manzanares did not know and reasonably could not have known that a birth and adoption would take place in Utah, entitling him to intervene in the proceedings.

John Hedrick, Manzanares’ Colorado attorney, said given the current loophole in Utah’s adoption law, he has taken to urging unwed fathers to file in Utah any time a birth mother has the slightest tie to the state or its predominant Mormon religion, a practice he’ll continue unless the law is changed.


© 2012 The Salt Lake Tribune