There are currently six pathways for an individual to establish legal parentage to a child in New York: biology; adoption; judicial estoppel; equitable estoppel; the existence of a preconception agreement to conceive and raise a child together; and, application of the presumption of legitimacy for a child born during a marriage. See Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A.C.C., 28 N.Y.3d 1 (2016); Christopher YY. v. Jessica ZZ., 159 A.D.3d 18, 25-34 (3d Dep't 2018). Each path to parentage examines a different set of factors to determine if an individual shall be adjudged a parent to the subject child. This article will explore the role, if any, the subject child's views and voice play in a parentage proceeding where the putative parent's claim is either based in equitable estoppel or application of the test set forth by the New York Court of Appeals in Brooke S.B. v. Elizabeth A.C.C.

Equitable estoppel is a doctrine that adjudges the bond between the subject child and putative parent. As the New York Court of Appeals noted previously, equitable estoppel "requires careful scrutiny of the child's relationship with the relevant adult … The focus is and must be on the child." See Matter of Shondel J. v. Mark D., 7 N.Y.3d 320 (2006). The petitioner must meet the following requirements: the biologic or adoptive parent consented to and fostered, the petitioner's formation and establishment of a parent-like relationship with the child; the petitioner and the child lived together in the same household; the petitioner assumed obligations of parenthood by taking significant responsibility for the child's care, education and development, including contributing towards the child's support; and the petitioner has been in a parental role for a length of time sufficient to have established with the child a bonded, dependent relationship parental in nature. See Sharon GG v. Duane HH, 63 N.Y.2d 859 (1983).