An Act To Implement the Recommendations of the Family Law Advisory Commission Concerning Adoption and Minor Guardianship
PART A
Sec. A-1. 18-C MRSA §9-302, as enacted by PL 2017, c. 402, Pt. A, §2 and affected by PL 2019, c. 417, Pt. B, §14, is amended to read:
§ 9-302. Consent for adoption
(1) Whether the person or agency determined the needs and interests of the child;
(2) Whether the person or agency determined the ability of the petitioner and other prospective families to meet the child's needs;
(3) Whether the person or agency made the decision consistent with the facts;
(4) Whether the harm of removing the child from the child's current placement outweighs any inadequacies of that placement; and
(4-A) Whether an agency withholding consent to the petitioner consented to the adoption of the child by a person who is a preadoptive parent as defined in Title 22, section 4002, subsection 9-A or who was identified as an appropriate permanency placement in a court-approved permanency plan pursuant to Title 22, section 4038-B; and
(5) All other factors that have a bearing on a determination of the reasonableness of the person's or agency's decision in withholding consent; and
A petition for adoption must be pending before a consent is executed.
(1) Received notice and failed to respond to the notice within the prescribed time period;
(2) Waived the right to notice under section 9-201, subsection 3;
(3) Does not establish parentage of the child under section 9-201, subsection 9; or
(4) Holds no parental rights regarding the adoptee under the laws of the foreign country in which the adoptee was born;
(1) The District Court in which the action under Title 22, chapter 1071 is pending; and
(2) The guardian ad litem for the child.
PART B
Sec. B-1. 18-C MRSA §9-204, sub-§3, as amended by PL 2019, c. 417, Pt. A, §105, is further amended to read:
(1) Termination is in the best interest of the child; and
(2) Either:
(a) The parent is unwilling or unable to protect the child from jeopardy, as defined by Title 22, section 4002, subsection 6, and these circumstances are unlikely to change within a time that is reasonably calculated to meet the child's needs;
(b) The parent has been unwilling or unable to take responsibility for the child within a time that is reasonably calculated to meet the child's needs; or
(c) The parent has abandoned the child, as described in Title 22, section 4002, subsection 1-A.
In making findings pursuant to this paragraph, the court may consider the extent to which the parent had opportunities to rehabilitate and to reunify with the child, including actions by the child’s other parent to foster or to interfere with a relationship between the parent and child or services provided by public or nonprofit agencies.
Sec. B-2. 18-C MRSA §9-204, sub-§3-A is enacted to read:
PART C
Sec. C-1. 18-C MRSA §9-308, as enacted by PL 2017, c. 402, Pt. A, §2 and affected by PL 2019, c. 417, Pt. B, §14, is amended to read:
§ 9-308. Final decree; dispositional hearing; effect of adoption ; post-adoption contact with siblings
If a minor adoptee is or will be separated from a sibling as a result of the adoption and there is no existing agreement for post-adoption contact between siblings, a court entering an adoption decree may, at that time, order the adoptive parents to provide specific post-adoption communication or contact, including, but not limited to, visits, written correspondence or calls, for an adopted child who lived with a sibling for at least 2 years if:
Sec. C-2. 22 MRSA §4002, sub-§11-A is enacted to read:
Sec. C-3. 22 MRSA §4068, as enacted by PL 2005, c. 526, §2, is amended to read:
§ 4068. Sibling visitation ; post-adoption contact
The court may approve an agreement for post-adoption communication or contact, including, but not limited to, visits, written correspondence or calls, between an adoptive child and one or more of the child's siblings based on a finding that it is in the best interests of the adoptive child and the child's sibling and a determination that the parent, guardian or custodian of each sibling has consented to the agreement. If the adoptive child is 12 years of age or older, the court may not approve the agreement unless the child consents to the agreement. If the adoptive child is under 12 years of age, the court shall determine the preference of the child, if the child is old enough to express a meaningful preference. The determination may be made with assistance of a guardian ad litem.
An adoptive parent is not required to make such an agreement but, if such an agreement is made and approved by the court at the time it is made, it is judicially enforceable, as long as the court finds it in the best interest of the siblings to enforce the agreement. Revocation of the adoption is not a remedy for failure to honor the agreement for post-adoption contacts.
PART D
Sec. D-1. 22 MRSA §4038-C, sub-§2, as amended by PL 2017, c. 402, Pt. C, §66 and affected by PL 2019, c. 417, Pt. B, §14, is further amended to read:
Sec. D-2. 22 MRSA §4038-E, as amended by PL 2017, c. 402, Pt. C, §67 and Pt. D, §1 and c. 411, §12 and affected by PL 2019, c. 417, Pt. B, §14, is repealed and the following enacted in its place:
§ 4038-E. Adoption from permanency guardianship
A permanency guardian may petition the District Court to adopt the child in the permanency guardian's care and to change the child's name upon the issuance of the adoption decree. The petition must be filed and adjudicated in accordance with Title 18-C, Article 9, except that the adoption may not be granted unless each living parent identified in the child protection action whose rights have not been terminated has executed a consent to the adoption pursuant to Title 18-C, section 9-202 or the court finds that such consent is not required pursuant to Title 18-C, section 9-302, subsection 2. A permanency guardian may not seek an order terminating the parental rights of a parent as part of a petition to adopt the child.
PART E
Sec. E-1. 18-C MRSA §5-211, as enacted by PL 2017, c. 402, Pt. A, §2 and affected by PL 2019, c. 417, Pt. B, §14, is repealed and the following enacted in its place:
§ 5-211. Transitional arrangement for minors; continued contact with former guardian after termination
(1) Is necessary to avoid a likelihood of harm to the minor resulting from severing the legal relationship with the former guardian;
(2) Would not significantly interfere with any parent-child relationship or with the parent's rightful authority over the minor; and
(3) Is in the best interest of the minor due to the existing relationship between the minor and the former guardian because the former guardian was a primary caregiver and custodian of the minor for a significant period of time.
Before ordering communication or contact pursuant to paragraph B the court shall grant due consideration to the specific objections of the parent to the entry of an order and determine whether ordering a period of transitional arrangements pursuant to subsection 1 is sufficient to mitigate harm to the minor. Except as Title 4, section 152, subsection 5-A may otherwise require, the court issuing the order for post-guardianship contact has continuing jurisdiction to modify, enforce or terminate the order and shall follow the procedure set forth in section 5-210.
SUMMARY
This bill implements the recommendations of the Family Law Advisory Commission as submitted to the Joint Standing Committee on Judiciary on December 1, 2019, pursuant to Public Law 2019, chapter 417, Part A, section 111.
Part A addresses the consent to an adoption by a minor adoptee and the person or agency having legal custody or guardianship of a minor adoptee. It amends the statute to make clear that courts are to take a bifurcated approach to the adoption proceeding if a petitioner is challenging the lack of consent from the person or agency, such as the Department of Health and Human Services. This change ensures that the court resolves the question of whether the person or agency unreasonably withheld its consent before the court makes findings regarding the requirements for the adoption itself, such as those set out in the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 18-C, section 9-308. The changes clarify that the court may alter the order of presentation of evidence if the person or agency has facts that the petitioner would need to include to prove the petitioner's contention that the person or agency unreasonably withheld its consent. Part A enables a court to require the person or agency to present its reasons for withholding consent and the facts supporting the decision before the petitioner presents evidence while the petitioner retains the burden of proof on the question of the person's or agency's alleged unreasonableness.
Part A amends the factors a court must consider when reviewing the reasonableness of an agency's withholding of consent to include a new factor: whether the agency granted consent to another petitioner who was previously approved by the agency or the court as the child's permanency placement.
Part A eliminates the ambiguity in the statute regarding whether the Department of Health and Human Services may consent to more than one petitioner by explicitly allowing the department to consent to more than one petitioner if the department concludes that multiple petitioners could each provide a suitable adoptive home for the child. The language gives the court authority to request the department to provide information and to make recommendations regarding the petitioners.
Part A amends the Adoption Act to lower the age of a minor's consent to the minor's adoption from 14 years of age to 12 years of age. Currently, a child 12 years of age or older must consent to the child's adoption by a permanency guardian.
Part B addresses the termination of parental rights in the context of adoption. The Adoption Act permits an adoption petitioner to file a petition to terminate the parental rights of the child's parent if that parent does not consent to the adoption or join the petition. The termination of parental rights standard in Title 18-C, section 9-204, subsection 3 is consistent with the Title 22 standard used in child protection cases, except that it does not include the language regarding the parent's failure to make a good faith effort to follow a reunification plan. Such plans are features of child protection matters but not adoption proceedings. The Adoption Act instead permits the court to consider the extent to which the parent had opportunities to rehabilitate and to reunify with the child, including actions by the child's other parent to foster or to interfere with a relationship between the parent and child or services provided by public or nonprofit agencies. This recent change to the termination of parental rights standard, however, does not entirely address the concerns about private termination of parental rights noted by the Law Court in Adoption of Isabelle T., 2017 ME 220, a stepparent adoption case in which a child's mother and stepfather successfully petitioned to terminate the parental rights of the child's father. The Law Court vacated the termination and emphasized the importance of considering the merits of the adoption petitioner who would be added as a parent as part of the best interests determination when ruling on a petition to terminate parental rights. Part B includes language expressly requiring courts terminating parental rights to make specific written findings. Title 18-C, section 9-204 is amended to require that the findings address the background and qualities of the prospective adoptive parent. In addition, Part B requires a court to consider the parent's attempts to reunify or maintain a relationship with a child as part of its analysis of the parent's alleged unfitness. Finally, Part B revises the consent to termination provision to make clear that a judge's explanation of the effects of a termination order must be provided to the parent prior to the parent's execution of the consent.
Part C addresses post-adoption contact rights for siblings separated by adoption. Part C amends Title 22, section 4068, which gives certain contact rights to siblings separated as a part of a child protection proceeding, to permit courts to approve post-adoption contact agreements between families who provide care for such siblings. Part C authorizes the court to approve an agreement for post-adoption contact based on a finding of the siblings' best interest if all siblings' parents, guardians or custodians consent and the siblings also consent, if they are 12 years of age or older. In the case of younger children, the court is required to determine the preference of the child regarding contact, if the child is old enough to express a meaningful preference. These court-approved agreements are enforceable as long as the court finds that such enforcement is in the best interest of the siblings. A person's failure to follow an agreement does not permit a party to seek revocation of the adoption itself. Part C also requires the court to ask a child whether the child would like visitation, communication or contact with a sibling. The inquiry may be made with the assistance of a guardian ad litem, and the court may appoint counsel for a child seeking sibling contact. Part C also adds a definition of "sibling" to the Child and Family Services and Child Protection Act.
Part C requires the court to provide notice of an adoption to any sibling of the child who has visitation or contact with the child under Title 22, section 4068. The court is required to reference in and attach to the adoption decree any post-adoption sibling contact agreement unless the court finds the agreement is no longer in the best interest of the child. The court may modify the agreement before referencing it in and attaching it to the decree.
Part C amends the Adoption Act to authorize an adoption court to order post-adoption sibling contact for adoptees who lived with a sibling for 2 or more years if such contact would be in the adoptee's and sibling's best interests and each sibling's parent, guardian or custodian has consented to the order. This language permits certain rights in Title 22, section 4068 to be extended potentially to any child separated from siblings by adoption, not only those in the child protection system.
Part D addresses adoptions from permanency guardianship. The parental consent requirement that is now in Title 22, section 4038-E, subsection 8, paragraph B is retained but amended to provide that the adoption petition must be filed and adjudicated in accordance with the Adoption Act. It clarifies that a permanency guardian may not seek an order terminating the parental rights of a parent as part of a petition to adopt the child. With this change, if a parent whose rights have not been terminated does not consent to the adoption, the adoption cannot proceed so long as the permanency guardianship is in place.
Part D amends the permanency guardianship provisions to clearly state that the appointment terminates when the child is no longer a minor or upon the minor's death or adoption.
Part E addresses post-guardianship contact for former guardians and minors. It gives courts an additional tool to mitigate or avoid harm or unnecessary trauma to a minor who has a strong relationship with the minor's guardian by providing some rights of contact between the former guardian and the minor after the guardianship is terminated. Specifically, the new provision permits a court, on timely motion of a parent or guardian, to order, at the time of the termination of the guardianship or the expiration of any transitional arrangement, rights of communication or contact, including overnight visitation, between a minor and the former guardian after the termination of the guardianship. The court may award such rights only if the parent and guardian consent or the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the order is necessary to avoid a likelihood of harm to the minor resulting from severing the legal relationship with the former guardian; would not significantly interfere with any parent-child relationship or with the parent's rightful authority over the minor; and is in the best interest of the minor due to the existing relationship between the minor and the former guardian because the former guardian was a primary caregiver and custodian of the minor for a significant period of time. The court is required to give due consideration to the specific objections of the parent to the entry of an order and to determine whether ordering a period of transitional arrangements is sufficient to mitigate harm to the minor. The language also makes clear that a court terminating a guardianship has jurisdiction to enter an order and that the court has continuing jurisdiction unless a different court has exclusive jurisdiction under the so-called Home Court Act.