In re Guardianship of Madelyn B.

New Hampshire Supreme Court · Family Law

Family LawParentageGuardianshipAdoptionStatutory Interpretationholding outpresumed parentagesame-sex parent

Facts

Susan and Melissa were in a long-term same-sex relationship and jointly planned for Melissa to conceive and raise a child with Susan as a parent. After Madelyn's birth, Susan lived with Madelyn, participated in her daily care and major life decisions, and was openly identified as Madelyn's parent in birth announcements, church, school, and medical records. Susan was later appointed Madelyn's guardian. After Susan and Melissa ended their relationship, Melissa eventually cut off Susan's contact with Madelyn, sought termination of the guardianship, and began adoption proceedings involving Melissa's husband.

Issue

Whether Susan's verified parenting petition stated a claim for parentage under RSA 168-B:3, I(d), even though that provision refers to a man being presumed to be the father of a child. More specifically, the question was whether the statute's holding-out presumption applies to women and whether Susan alleged sufficient facts to invoke it.

Rule

RSA 168-B:3, I(d), which presumes parentage when a person receives a child into the home and openly holds the child out as that person's own, applies equally to women and men. A lack of biological connection does not bar application of the holding-out presumption when the petitioner alleges facts showing receipt of the child into the home and open acknowledgment of the child as her own.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Concord, New Hampshire, Tessa Cole and Nina Rowan jointly decided to have a child through donor insemination. After Ava was born, Tessa lived with Ava for four years, signed school forms as a parent, and introduced Ava at church and medical appointments as her daughter. When the relationship ended, Nina moved to dismiss Tessa’s parentage petition, arguing the statute applies only to a man presumed to be a father.

How should the court rule on Nina’s motion to dismiss?

Explanation. The majority held that the statutory holding-out presumption applies equally to women and men. A nonbiological petitioner states a claim by alleging that she received the child into her home and openly held the child out as her own. Biology is not a prerequisite at the pleading stage. (Derived from In re Guardianship of Madelyn B. (n.d.).)