M.B. v. D.W.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 2007 · Family Law

Family LawAdoptionTermination of Parental Rightsstepfather adoptiontermination of parental rightsnonconsensual adoptionclear and convincing evidenceemotional injury

Facts

After the parents divorced, they agreed to joint custody, with the mother providing the child's primary residence and the father receiving liberal visitation; the father also had financial obligations including health insurance reimbursement and half of uninsured medical expenses. After moving to Florida, the father began gender reassignment procedures, displayed significant feminine physical changes to the children without preparing them, later underwent gender reassignment surgery, and sought visitation despite the child's resistance. The child developed major depression, suicidal ideation, declining school performance, physical symptoms, and withdrawn behavior, and a psychiatrist testified these problems were related to the father's actions surrounding the transition. The father also failed to reimburse the mother for the child's health insurance premiums and uninsured medical expenses.

Issue

Whether the circuit court properly granted a stepfather adoption without the biological father's consent by finding, on clear and convincing evidence, that the child was neglected, that statutory grounds for termination existed, and that termination and adoption were in the child's best interests. The appeal also asked whether the court abused its discretion by ordering the father to pay half of the psychiatrist's trial appearance fee.

Rule

An adoption without the consent of a living biological parent is, in effect, a termination of parental rights and requires findings under KRS 625.090 by clear and convincing evidence: the child must be abused or neglected as defined in KRS 600.020(1), termination must be in the child's best interests, and at least one statutory ground in KRS 625.090(2) must exist. On appeal, the trial court's findings will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous, and substantial evidence supporting the findings is sufficient even if the evidence is contradicted.

🔒

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 Lexington, Tara Boone petitions for her husband, Eric Boone, to adopt 14-year-old Lila without the consent of Lila's biological father, Nolan Price, who is alive and objects. The family court finds only that adoption would be better for Lila because Eric has acted like her father for years, but it makes no findings that Lila is abused or neglected and identifies no statutory ground for termination.

If Nolan appeals, which is the strongest argument under the governing rule?

Explanation. An adoption without the consent of a living biological parent is treated as a termination of parental rights. The court must find by clear and convincing evidence that the child is abused or neglected, that termination is in the child's best interests, and that at least one statutory ground exists under the termination statute. A best-interests finding alone is insufficient. (Derived from M.B. v. D.W. (n.d.).)