In this adoption case The Supreme Court of South Carolina held in Doe v. Baby Girl, 376 S.C. 267; 657 S.E.2d 455; 2008 S.C., that South Carolina would assume jurisdiction because it was in the baby’s best interest.
On June 16, 2006, the birth mother gave birth in Illinois to a full-term baby girl (“Baby Girl”). On June 19, 2006 in Illinois circuit court, attorney Denise Patton represented the birth mother, who stated under oath that she intended to place Baby Girl up for adoption and the parents lived in South Carolina. The birth mother agreed that all matters relating to the adoption of her child, including, but not limited to the right to evoke my relinquishment, to notice of further proceedings in the adoption and termination of her parental rights, shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the state of South Carolina.
The birth mother checked a box in the identification document that she did not know the identity of the biological father. She stated she was raped and knew the birth father through friends of friends and did not know his full name and she would not say his first name. In the consent to adoption she refused the name of the birth father but stated he had not supported her and had not paid any pre-birth expenses.
On June 20, 2006, appellants returned to South Carolina with Baby Girl and filed an action for adoption in South Carolina family court. On July 14, 2006, the birth father filed a petition in Illinois circuit court requesting that the court void ab initio the June Illinois order which appointed Patton guardian of Baby Girl for the purpose of transporting her to South Carolina. The birth father petitioned that the birth mother knew his identity and whereabouts at all times and had told him the baby had been born brain dead. The birth father argued that because he received no notice, the Illinois court was without jurisdiction to enter the June Illinois order. Appellants were not named as the parties in the birth father’s petition although they had physical custody of Baby Girl in South Carolina.
The appellants filed an amended adoption complaint in South Carolina family court on July 21, 2006. The birth father was named and referenced in the amended pleading. The family court granted appellant’s request for an emergency hearing. The hearing took place on July 31, 2006 and Judge Turbeville issued a temporary order on August 2, 2006 which granted temporary legal custody of Baby Girl to appellants. The Judge also ordered a paternity test to determine whether the birth father was the biological father of Baby Girl. Also, the family court discovered information regarding the birth father’s criminal history which included domestic violence and drug offenses. The family court found under South Carolina’s Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA), South Carolina is Baby Girl’s “home state” and it was in the baby’s best interest for South Carolina assume jurisdiction.
No comments:
Post a Comment