Opinion ID: 2071342
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Abandonment Established

Text: One of the statutory bases for terminating parental rights is abandonment. With respect to a child Christopher's age, the Delaware statutory definition of abandonment is: [A] minor who has attained six months of age at the time a petition for termination of parental rights has been filed, and for whom the respondent, for a period of at least six consecutive months immediately preceding the filing of the petition, has failed to: 1. make reasonable and consistent payments, in accordance with the respondent's financial means, for the support of the minor; and 2. communicate or visit regularly with the minor; and 3. manifest the ability and willingness to exercise parental responsibilities, if during the time, the minor was not in the physical custody of the other parent. [5] Each element of this statutory definition of abandonment must be shown by clear and convincing evidence. [6] The statute further provides that the respondent's act of abandonment cannot be cured by subsequent conduct. No present intent to abandon the minor need be proved by the petitioner. [7] The Family Court found that the first criterion for abandonment had been established by clear and convincing evidence: failure to make reasonable and consistent payments in accordance with the Father's financial means. The record reflects that during the six months that preceded the Shepherds' filing of the TPR petition, the Father was living with his grandparents and was employed. The Family Court found that the Father had the financial means to make payments towards Christopher's support. The evidence established, however, that Greg has never made any payments for Christopher's support. The Family Court found that the second criterion for abandonment had been established by clear and convincing evidence: the Father's failure to communicate with or visit regularly with Christopher. Greg testified that although he has seen pictures of Christopher, he has never met Christopher. The uncontested evidence at trial also reflected that the Father failed to send Christopher any cards, letters or gifts. The Family Court acknowledged that the Shepherds had not responded to the September 13, 1996 letter from the Father's attorney about establishing visitation. The Family Court also noted that although the Father was represented by the same attorney since before Christopher's birth, the Father did not seek any relief from the Family Court until after the TPR petition was filed and Christopher was already more than one-year old. The Family Court found that the third criterion for abandonment had not been established: failure to manifest the ability and willingness to exercise parental responsibility for a period of at least six months immediately preceding the filing of the termination petition. Parental responsibilities are defined in the Delaware statute as the care, support, and control of the child in a manner that provides for the child's necessary physical needs, including adequate food, clothing and shelter, and that also provides for the mental and emotional health and development of each child. [8] The Family Court's finding is not supported by the record evidence. The record reflects clear and convincing evidence that the Father has never manifested either the willingness or ability to assume any parental responsibilities. The Father testified that he called his attorney during the summer of 1996 to ask what he needed to do to see Christopher. He was advised to file a visitation petition in the Family Court. The Father testified that he did not file a petition for visitation because he did not want to pay child support. The Father admitted at trial that he could not recall a single thing he had done in the six months before the TPR petition was filed in an effort to visit Christopher. After the Shepherds' TPR petition was filed, the Father testified at the custody hearing on the cross-petition of the Father, the Mother and the Shepherds. The Father agreed that it was in Christopher's best interest for custody to be awarded to the Shepherds. We have concluded that the record reflects that the Father's abandonment of Christopher was established by clear and convincing evidence. Even if the statutory grounds for termination are met, however, a lawful termination of parental rights must also be in the best interests of the child. [9] Accordingly, we proceed to an analysis of Christopher's best interests.