Background
Twin children had lived with their paternal grandmother since May 2015, when they were only a few months old. The grandmother first held custody and later became their kinship guardian. In April 2024 she petitioned to adopt them, alleging under Domestic Relations Law § 111(2)(a) that the biological mother’s consent was unnecessary because the mother had abandoned the children.
After a hearing, Orange County Family Court found abandonment and granted both adoption petitions. The mother appealed. The dispute required the Second Department to assess whether the grandmother proved, by clear and convincing evidence, an intent to forgo parental rights and obligations through the mother’s lack of contact despite an ability to communicate, and whether the grandmother had frustrated attempted contact.
The Court’s Holding
The Second Department affirmed. Domestic Relations Law § 111(2)(a) dispenses with a parent’s adoption consent when the parent, though able to do so, evinces an intent to relinquish parental rights and duties by failing for six months to visit or communicate with the child or the person having legal custody. Because adoption permanently alters the legal parent-child relationship, abandonment must be established by clear and convincing evidence.
The hearing record met that standard. From February through November 2023, the mother did not visit or communicate with the children or their grandmother. She visited once in November 2023, but her later contact remained limited, sporadic, and insubstantial. The evidence also showed that she had sent no letters or gifts and provided no financial support since 2020.
The appellate court deferred to Family Court’s supported factual finding that the grandmother did not frustrate the mother’s efforts to maintain a relationship. A single visit and occasional later communication did not erase the completed period of abandonment or demonstrate sustained parental responsibility. With consent legally unnecessary, the adoption orders remained in place.
Key Takeaways
- Six months without contact can establish abandonment when the parent was able to communicate and the custodian did not obstruct access.
- A later isolated visit or sporadic communication does not necessarily revive the right to withhold adoption consent.
- Courts consider the full pattern of visits, calls, gifts, letters, financial support, ability to contact, and alleged interference by the custodian.
Why It Matters
For New York family-law practitioners, the decision shows that abandonment analysis is practical and evidence intensive. Calendars, messages, call logs, visitation records, support payments, gifts, and proof of efforts to overcome barriers can determine whether consent is required. A parent opposing adoption should document consistent attempts to maintain the relationship rather than rely on isolated contacts near the filing date.
Kinship guardians seeking adoption must still satisfy a demanding evidentiary burden, and custodians cannot manufacture abandonment by blocking access. The ruling does not create a numerical test beyond the statutory six-month period; it evaluates whether conduct demonstrates a genuine continuation or relinquishment of parental obligations. Here, the extended silence, minimal later contact, and years without material support provided the required clear and convincing proof.
Parents facing barriers such as transportation, illness, incarceration, conflict with a guardian, or limited finances should preserve evidence of efforts to call, write, visit, obtain court assistance, or provide support within their means. Guardians should likewise keep neutral records of contacts offered and received. That documentation helps Family Court distinguish inability or obstruction from an intent to forgo parental duties while keeping the children’s stability at the center of the adoption proceeding.
The appellate posture also reflects the deference given to Family Court’s hearing-based findings when they have a sound and substantial basis in the record. Credibility disputes about offered visits or blocked communications should be developed through specific testimony and corroborating records. Appellate counsel must show more than a competing interpretation of the evidence. The focus remains the parent’s demonstrated course of conduct during the statutory period and the reliability of the trial court’s factual findings.