We are facing a custody challenge from our adopted baby's birthfather. His case is weak, and it probably won't be allowed to proceed, but I'm curious about all sorts of "what ifs," and my lawyer refuses to speculate--she likes to keep her eye on the facts of where we are now. Which is good in a lawyer. But it means I have unanswered questions.

One is that I have been told that if a judge allows the case to continue, the putative father will have to show that he is a "fit parent." I am wondering what standard the court will hold him to. Will he have to have drug testing? Background checks? Proof of income/stable housing? What other things might the court consider?

Thanks.

S.

We are facing a custody challenge from our adopted baby's birthfather. His case is weak, and it probably won't be allowed to proceed, but I'm curious about all sorts of "what ifs," and my lawyer refuses to speculate--she likes to keep her eye on the facts of where we are now. Which is good in a lawyer. But it means I have unanswered questions.

One is that I have been told that if a judge allows the case to continue, the putative father will have to show that he is a "fit parent." I am wondering what standard the court will hold him to. Will he have to have drug testing? Background checks? Proof of income/stable housing? What other things might the court consider?

Thanks.

S. It is up to the judge, but what happened in the adoption, that he is now allowed to attempt to get his child back?

Oh, I hadn't necessarily wanted to go into all that. But, in a nutshell, here's where we're at:

Baby was born 8/2 and we took custody 8/7. Bmom signed surrenders; in Illinois, they're irrevocable. She claimed that she did not know who the bfather was, that he was a one-night stand and she never knew his name, so we began proceedings (publication, etc) to terminate the rights of an unknown father.

In the couple of weeks after the placement, the bmom began to regret it, and began to invoke the birthfather ("I'll call the father and then you'll have to give me my baby back," stuff like that, according to our agency).

The guy we're now dealing with registered with the putative father registry in Illinois. He did NOT petition for a paternity action within 30 days of that, as required by law. Our lawyer notified him of the hearing to terminate unknown persons' rights, and he failed to appear. Two weeks ago, though, he went to the clerk's office at the court and asked for a court-appointed attorney so that he can contest the adoption.

At this point, the court has agreed to appoint him an attorney, and that should happen in the next couple of weeks. On Nov. 19, there will be a "status hearing" at which, as I understand it, our lawyer (and his, if he has one by then) will report that he has a lawyer, etc. Nothing substantive is expected to happen at that hearing.

Our lawyer hasn't been able to present anything substantive to the court re: his failures to meet the requirements of the law, or the birthmother's actions (although she did show up at last week's hearing about appointing him an attorney, and behaved so badly she had to be removed from the courtroom), because the court won't hear it until he has representation. We're hoping at that time that this guy's failure to meet his legal obligations will mean that things won't proceed, but that depends on the judge, as I understand it. Someone I know on-line was in a similar situation a year ago, and the judge did not allow the challenge to the adoption to proceed in part because of the birthfather's failure to comply with legal requirements, so of course we're hoping for something similar here.

That was a really big nutshell. The birthmom seems to be really driving this--our lawyer said that in court it seemed like the motivation was all hers. We'll see what happens; I'm just curious about the process of what might happen.

S

She may be behind it. Who knows. Sometimes, judges allow people who are ignorant of the law extra time. Personally, he should have the opportunity, but that is my opinion.

This is derailing from the question I answered, but this guy was not ignorant of the law. He registered with the putative father's registry, and on that form, which he filled out, it explains that the birthfather must follow up by petitioning the court within 30 days, and even gives a number to call for legal assistance in doing so. He was also not ignorant about the previous hearing he failed to show up for; he was served a summons for it. So I'm not sure why you would think he was "ignorant of the law," since his prior actions show that he was not.

But that doesn't have anything to do with my question!! I am curious about what kinds of standards courts apply when deciding whether someone is a fit parent; I understand that it may vary, but would be interested in generalizations or in descriptions of specific instances.

S.

If he is found to be the biological father by way of DNA, he may not need to prove that he is a fit parent depending upon the court. Since he had no knowledge that the adoption process was going on without him, you may need to be the one proving that he is unfit most likely.

The courts are against taking children away from their biological parents without really good reasons.

it will depend on the judge, but I would assume it would be more of you trying to prove him unfit like with anything else. He will have to have a parenting plan- where he'll live, child care, Dr, etc

Thanks to people who are trying to answer my question; it's interesting how many assumptions people are jumping to, though--for instance, he obviously DID know that an adoption plan was being made, in plenty of time to assert his parental rights. He didn't do so.

Really, can I try one more time: I AM NOT ASKING FOR FEEDBACK OR ADVICE ABOUT MY SPECIFIC SITUATION, still less uninformed opinions. I am curious, in general, about how courts decide parental "fitness" and "unfitness." Can anyone talk knowledgeably about that?

It's not how they prove fitness, it's how they would prove someone to be unfit.

To be unfit, you would have to have a history of problems or no way of supporting a child.

As for assumptions on the adoption, we tell men who think their girlfriends may be pregnant with their child all the time to file on the punitive father's registry just in case. He didn't necessarily know about the adoption.

Thanks to people who are trying to answer my question; it's interesting how many assumptions people are jumping to, though--for instance, he obviously DID know that an adoption plan was being made, in plenty of time to assert his parental rights. He didn't do so.

Really, can I try one more time: I AM NOT ASKING FOR FEEDBACK OR ADVICE ABOUT MY SPECIFIC SITUATION, still less uninformed opinions. I am curious, in general, about how courts decide parental "fitness" and "unfitness." Can anyone talk knowledgeably about that?

Is the father a convicted sex offender?

Has the father ever been convicted of child abuse or neglect?

Has the father ever been convicted of a serious felony involving children?

Has the father ever had any previous children removed from his custody for any reason?

Is the father a PROVEN drug user with several convictions?

If the answer to those is no, then he would likely be found to be a fit parent.

To be able to prove that a parent is unfit it has to be proven that the parent presents a very real immediate danger to the child.