Co-Parent Adoption: The Ease and the Pitfalls of the Simplified Process
Even with the steps forward taken by this state to promote equality for same-sex couples with respect to marriage and adoption, it is evident there are still gaps in our statutory scheme that need reform to adequately reflect society's evolving attitude to promoting strong family structures for all couples seeking to start a family.
January 22, 2024 at 10:30 AM
7 minute read
In recognition of the outdated legal limits placed on same-sex couples ability to start a family, the New Jersey Legal Parentage Act (N.J.S.A. 9:17-69 to 71) amended the law governing the adoption of children in 2020. The law now permits civil union partners and married same-sex couples to obtain a judgment of adoption, in simplified fashion, without background checks or a court appearance. This new simplified co-parent adoption legislation replaces the cumbersome procedure of a second parent or step-parent adoption for same-sex couples.
Unlike for same-sex couples, there is a presumption of paternity for a husband under N.J.S.A. 9:17-43 for married heterosexual couples. Prior to the enactment of the Legal Parentage Act, same-sex couples had to undergo a lengthy and expensive process to adopt, even if both parents were listed on the child's birth certificate. The adoption process, for same-sex parents previously required background checks including: (l) Criminal History Record Information (CHRI) fingerprint background checks; (2) Division of Child Protection and Permanency system name checks, now referred to as Child Abuse Records Information (CARI); and (3) Domestic Violence Registry checks. As a result of the enactment of the Legal Parentage Act, courts now waive those background checks. However, the co-parent adoption process does not obviate the need for same-sex couples in New Jersey to obtain a judgment of adoption, it merely simplifies the process.
To qualify for a co-parent adoption under the Legal Parentage Act, specifically N.J.S.A. 9:17-71(b), the petitioners must file an adoption complaint, along with (l) proof of a valid civil union or marriage between the natural or legal parent and that person's partner in civil union or spouse, issued prior to the birth of the child; (2) an original birth certificate issued by the State Registrar of Vital Statistics on which both partners in civil union or spouses are listed as parents of the child; and (3) a written declaration signed by both parties to the action that describes in sufficient detail how the child was conceived and identifies any other involved parties so that the court may determine whether those individuals have parental rights to the child.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllReminder: Court Rules and Statutes Apply to Pendente Lite Custody Decisions
8 minute readAttorney of the Year Finalist: Matheu Nunn's Supreme Court Successes
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Lawyer’s Resolutions: Focusing on 2025
- 2Houston Judge Exonerated on Appeal, Public Reprimand Vacated
- 3Bar Report - Dec. 30
- 4Employment Law Developments to Expect From the Second Trump Administration
- 5How I Made Law Firm Leadership: 'It’s Imperative That You Never Stop Learning,' Says Ian Ribald of Ballard Spahr
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250