Opinion ID: 2326578
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Whether the Trial Court Gave Weighty Consideration to the Mother's Preference.

Text: We note at the outset that the circumstances of this case compel us to once again remind trial courts that when a natural parent, with parental rights intact, consents to an adoption petition in a contested adoption proceeding, the trial court cannot merely weigh the competing adoption petitions against one another, as if they began in equipoise. This case came dangerously close to requiring reversal in this regard because the trial court did not make explicit findings on the issue of whether the weighty consideration due to the mother's choice of caregiver was overcome by clear and convincing evidence that her choice was clearly contrary to the best interests of the child. See, e.g., T.W.M. I, supra, 964 A.2d at 606 (emphasis added) (finding that the matter of the child's adoption must be considered anew where appellants were prejudiced because the trial court's decision misapplied the law relating to their designation of a custodian for their child, and the adoption decree terminated their parental rights); see also R.E.S., supra, 19 A.3d at 793 (quoting In re Ja.J., 814 A.2d 923, 924 (D.C.2002) (We have `granted relief in [ ] cases [where] the trial court had not given sufficient consideration to the alternate custody arrangements proposed by the [parent].')); A.T.A., supra, 910 A.2d at 297 (If the trial court has not given sufficient consideration to the natural parent's choice, ... we have generally reversed the trial court's decision.). We reiterate that courts must, as a threshold inquiry, give weighty consideration to a parent's choice of a fit custodian, unless it is established that the parent is not competent to make such a decision. T.J., supra, 666 A.2d at 11. A natural parent's choice may be overcome only by a showing, by clear and convincing evidence, that the custodial arrangement ... is clearly contrary to the child's best interest. Id. In keeping with the fundamental rights at stake in contested adoption proceedings, see id., the focus must remain on the question of whether the party lacking the natural parents' blessing has met his or her burden to overcome the natural parents' contrary preference. Nevertheless, in this particular case, it is clear that the trial court gave extensive consideration to the merits of the mother's choice of caretaker, the Ds. In its fifty-three-page opinion, the trial court discussed in detail the fitness of the Ds as potential caretakers, but ultimately concluded that moving A.S. from her current home where she has bonded with her foster family would subject her to psychological harm. Thus, we are satisfied that the trial court gave sufficient consideration to the mother's preference. See R.E.S., supra, 19 A.3d at 790 (finding that weighty consideration standard was satisfied where the fitness of [the birth parent's] proposed caretakers was the focal point of the trial and of the court's detailed findings of fact and conclusions of law and almost all of the evidence presented... was directed toward this issue).