CHILDREN AND THE LAW
...Dependency Petitions
......Selection & Implement. Hrg.
.........Termination of Parental Rights
............Term. of Alleged/Presumed F's Rights
 20 Cards On This Topic:
  • Statute authorizing termination of biological father’s rights.
  • Absent clear and convincing showing of unfitness, equal protection and due process require nonpresumed biological father be allowed to withhold consent to adoption.
  • Unwed F’s failure to totally commit to fatherhood during pregnancy negates his right to veto 3d party at-birth adoption.
  • State statute, which failed to give notice of minor’s adoption to biological father who was not presumed father, held constitutional. Mere biological link not constitutionally protected.
  • No abuse of discretion in denying F's request for paternity testing as court could conclusively determine w/out genetic testing that F, in jail at time of conception, could not be C's biological father.
  • Unwed mother has no unqualified, unilateral right to decide her baby will be adopted and to deny biological F his right to parent his child under either FC §7611 or Kelsey S.—F here qualified under Kelsey S.
  • Trial court's informal preview of its ruling may not be used to impeach the subsequent formal statement of decision.
  • Order terminating biological & presumed F's parental rights was constitutionally invalid because the court never made a finding that he was an unfit parent.
  • No violation of equal protection or due process in holding an unwed father's own criminal activity against him when assessing whether he has met the criteria for Kelsey S. rights.
  • Due process requires juvenile court not terminate a presumed father's parental rights without first finding, by clear and convincing evidence, that father is unfit—poverty is not a proper ground.
  • Harmless error to fail to comply with W&IC 316.2 and (former) CRC 1413 notice requirements where alleged F failed to meet reqs to be presumed F, had no relationship with C and crim history limited reunification options.
  • Father's handwritten pro se notice of appeal of court's "findings," because he didn't get a paternity test, included termination order, which followed from refusal to grant paternity test request.
  • While F did not expressly request presumed father status, formal request would have been futile given actions of court & DCFS and omission was not a waiver of his right to challenge order denying reunification request.
  • Possible F had standing to appeal where he appeared and asserted he was C's father, wanted to confirm this with paternity test, and wanted to know and support his son.
  • Juvenile court's failure to comply with provisions of W&IC 316.2 and CRC 1413 for determining paternity required reversal of order terminating parental rights.
  • Alleged father could appeal rather than file for extraordinary writ where it was juv. court's failure to follow statutory procedures after W&IC 366.26 hearing—when existence as alleged father became known—that gave rise to appeal.
  • Court’s refusal to terminate parental rights of abusive father who murdered wife and to free Ms for adoption is reversible error.
  • Father’s rights may be terminated before formal commencement of adoption proceedings.
  • May not use former Civ. Code section 224 to terminate parent’s rights where custodial parent does not have sole legal custody.
  • Cases discussing termination of alleged and presumed fathers' rights.


    •