About

As the largest
university-based local
government training,
advisory, and research
organization in the United
States, the School of
Government serves more
than 12,000 public officials
each year.

Browse by Role

The School provides
content and resources for a
wide array of local
government and judicial
officials in North Carolina.

Select your role to explore
all related content.

Browse by Topic

The School provides content
and resources on a wide array
of topics in local government
and judicial administration in
North Carolina.

Select a topic to explore all
related content.

Courses

The School of Government
offers up to 200 courses,
workshops, webinars, and
professional conferences
each year.

Publications

The School of Government
publishes essential books,
manuals, reports, articles,
bulletins, and other print and
online content related to state
and local government.

Blogs

Faculty write for a number
of School of Government
blogs providing timely
updates on emerging issues.

Resources

The School of Government
offers information and
services related to a wide
range of topics relevant to
government and judicial
officials—in-person and on a
variety of platforms.

Blog Posts

Timely updates on emerging issues

Centers and Services

Specialized training/research hubs and consulting services

Frequently Asked Questions

Aggregated answers to common questions on a variety of topics

Knapp Library

Print and online materials and research expertise

Legal Summaries

Brief descriptions of legal cases, bills, or legislative activity

Listservs

Information exchanges for peers and faculty experts

Microsites

In-depth or aggregated content for local government and judicial officials

Tools and Apps

Online and mobile tools for employees on-the-go

Master of Public
Administration Program

The UNC MPA program prepares public service leaders. The program is offered in two formats: on-campus and online.

For more information, visit mpa.unc.edu

Giving

The School of Government depends on private and public support for fulfilling its mission. Your gift will make a lasting impact on the quality of government and civic participation in North Carolina.

Knapp Library

The Joseph Palmer Knapp Library houses a large collection of material on state and local government, public administration, and management to support the School's instructional and research programs and the educational mission of the Master of Public Administration program. Reference and research services are available to all residents of North Carolina, and additional assistance is available to state and local government personnel, both elected and appointed.

In re Adoption of B.J.R., 238 N.C. App. 308 (2014)

New Search

Print Results

Held:

Affirmed

Timeline:

Jan. 7, 2013, child born
Jan. 13, 2013, unwed father files action for genetic testing, custody, and child support
Feb. 13, 2013, petition for adoption filed
Feb. 21, 2013 unwed father files objection to adoption proceeding asserting his consent is required
July 2013 genetic testing confirms he is the father
August 26, 2013 trial court denies father’s motion to dismiss concluding his consent was not required

G.S. 48-3-601 requires the consent of a man who prior to the filing of the adoption petition or hearing completes three acts: (1) acknowledge paternity, (2) communicate or attempt to communicate with the mother regularly, and (3) make reasonable and consistent support payments within his financial means for the mother, child, or both. Father failed to meet the 3^rd prong, therefore, his consent was not required pursuant to both the statute and holding in In re Byrd.
Statute is not unconstitutional as it applies to father when relying on the reasoning in Lehr and In re S.D.W. Plaintiff did not grasp the opportunities within his control to develop a relationship with the child after the child’s birth. In the child’s first 6 months, plaintiff’s actions were limited to filing for custody, visiting once despite more times being offered to him, and purchasing diapers once but never delivering them. Awaiting genetic testing results prior to paying support or taking further steps to develop a relationship with the child is not a valid excuse for a delay in father’s action.