Case Summary: This decision stems from two Petitions for Adoption by a Stepparent filed by a non-spouse, requesting adoption of his partner's adopted sons. The Court first considered whether or not Mr. S. had standing as a non-spouse to bring a petition for adoption without altering his life partner's parental rights in the children. The Court, in concluding that Mr. S. had standing, reviewed the laws of statutory construction and decisional case law surrounding adoption. The Court also relied on prior precedent "recognizing a statutory scheme [for adoption] designed to effect a social good and to eliminate an unfortunate social circumstance for innocent children." Under Delaware's adoption statute, Mr. S. qualifies as an unmarried person who was a resident of Delaware at the time of the filing of the petition. 13 Del. C. § 903.
     The Court then turned to the issue of whether Delaware law prohibits "second parent" adoptions. The Court reviewed § 903 and concluded that unmarried person could be read singularly or plurally, and that while the General Assembly may have not specifically contemplated second parent adoptions, "it is inconceivable to conclude, given the statutory mandate to read the statute in the best interest of children, that our Legislature would have meant to exclude loving and nurturing two parent homes as a resource for some of the states most needy children."
     The Court further held that adoption by a stepparent does not alter Mr. H's parental rights in the boys, relying on 13 Del. C. § 919(b). The last legal hurdle the Court had to address before performing a best interests analysis was whether or not Mr. S. was a "stepparent" within the meaning of the statute. The Court acknowledged that while Mr. S. may not meet a traditional definition of stepparent, a review of cases around the country have examined the role of stepparent in a "de facto parent" context. The Court, in great detail, laid out some factors to consider in making such a determination, and in this case concluded that Mr. S. has been a parent to these children in every respect.
     The Court then examined the best interests factors. In doing so, the Court heard from several child welfare experts, and considered several home studies and reports done with respect to the original termination of parental rights and adoption proceedings. The Court also heard from Judge Jurden and Jennifer Barber, Esq., appointed as guardians ad litem for the boys. The Court was overwhelmed with evidence that adoption by Mr. S. of the boys was in their best interests. The Court then granted the petitions for adoption allowing both boys to be legally adopted by Mr. S.

     From the Child's Perspective: This decision is a monumental breakthrough for today's children, in an area which is morally and culturally sensitive. With the greatest of respect for the various belief systems that make us Americans, what children need most is the love of a family. Today, families come in all shapes and sizes. What decades of child welfare research has told us is that children need a safe, stable home life with loving, nurturing caregivers. While various legal issues had to be overcome to provide that permanency to these children, the bottom line is they need and deserve a family who will love them, care for them, and raise them to be responsible, productive adults. We are humbled and grateful for this family's commitment to these boys.

Back to Case Law