Source: https://familylaw.typepad.com/virginiafamilylawappeals/child_custody_nonparents/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 05:50:48+00:00

Document:
T.S.G. v. B.A.S.: CUSTODY – THIRD PARTIES – “DETRIMENT” OR “BEST INTERESTS”? – ADOPTION STATUTES – GRANDPARENT ADOPTION – CONSENT WITHDRAWAL.
The various adoption statutes can constitute a maze of complexity for any parent who gives her child up for adoption and then thinks that her consent is easily withdrawn, as a mother found out in T.S.G. v. B.A.S., ___ Va. App. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___, 23 VLW 380 (9/2/08). Therein the Court of Appeals lectures everyone about the subtle relationship of §63.2-1242.3 on close-relative adoptions, and §63.1-1204 on consents, and decides that §1204 “reads on” §1242.3, the requirements of which are not displaced or modified by §1204. This mother executed a valid consent to adoption under §1202 and she didn’t revoke it under §1204's requirements – which apply to §1242.3 (close family adoptions.) Thus she can’t escape the rigid requirements of §1204 for withdrawing your consent. The mother also contended that the trial court is supposed to have considered, in any contest between a third party custodian and a natural mother, whether mother’s keeping the child would be “detrimental to” the child, and not just decide best interests. But the Court of Appeals says the trial court was not required to do that. Once a court determines that she made a valid consent and did not validly withdraw it, the only question was best interests. This 10-year old child had been living with the grandmother since age 2, and best interest was clear. The mother claimed that the grandmother got the child by fraud since she didn’t tell the trial court the mother was contesting the adoption, but that claim is rejected because it appears from the record that the grandmother’s lawyer told the court everything about that. The court had been made aware of the mother’s opposition in several ways, and the mother herself intervened and was heard in court.
Lynchburg DSS v. Cook: THIRD PARTY CUSTODY – FOSTER CARE STATUTES OR CUSTODY STATUTES?
One of the areas in which the Supreme Court lately has shown a disposition to accept cases for review, write full opinions and tell the Court of Appeals they were wrong, is the area of taking children away from their natural parents to award custody to others. In Lynchburg DSS v. Cook, ___ Va. ___, ___ S.E.2d ___, 23 VLW 431 (9/12/08), it says the intermediate court was wrong in applying the general custody statutes to a third-party case (petition by grandparents) when “abuse or neglect” had been found and the foster care statutes applied.

References: v. 
 v. 
 §63
 §63
 §1204
 §1242
 §1204
 §1202
 §1204
 §1242
 §1204
 v. 
 v.