Court Opinion

ID: 9791927
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 02:20:35.435032+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:39.441365
License: Public Domain

NEWMAN, J.,
specially concurring.
Mother asserts that she revoked her consent to the adoption. Although she argues that ORS 109.312 provides the only means to make a natural parent’s consent irrevocable and supplants common law estoppel, she also argues that, under the facts, she was not estopped from revoking her consent. Her assignment of error is broad enough to encompass that argument. Accordingly, the majority should address whether the trial court was correct when it determined that the facts show a common law estoppel. See D.M.C. and G.T.C. v. 35 Or App 833, 583 P2d 22 (1978). Because I believe that the facts show a common law estoppel, I concur in the majority opinion.
The trial court was correct that mother was not under duress and understood the legal effect of her consent. Thirteen months had elapsed since mother placed her children in *270petitioners’ care as foster parents, and five months had elapsed since she had consented to their adoption. During that period, although she had called petitioners to confirm that they were caring properly for her children, she did not state misgivings about the adoption. Mother attempted to revoke her consent two months after petitioners had initiated the adoption proceedings.
The trial court also properly considered mother’s conduct with respect to her children both before and after she consented to the adoption. It found correctly that mother had not provided her children with an “adequate home” before the adoption proceeding and had exposed them to conditions that were detrimental to their welfare. Mother had not properly cared for her children. While under her care, the children were exposed to adults who engaged in fights, used illegal drugs and had sex in their presence. The children were frequently unkempt and unattended. Moreover, they have accepted petitioners as their parents and will be emotionally harmed if they are returned to mother. Mother was estopped to revoke her consent.