In re L.C., _ N.C. App. _ (Apr. 16, 2024)

New Search

Print Results

Held:

Vacated and Remanded

Facts: Juvenile was adjudicated neglected based on history of substance use by Mother and Mother’s live-in female partner who is a caretaker to the juvenile. The petition alleged Mother’s partner (“Caretaker") was identified as the juvenile’s father on the juvenile’s birth certificate, though the birth certificate was not presented at the hearings or in the record on appeal. The trial court treated Caretaker as the juvenile’s legal father throughout the case, even appointing Caretaker counsel as a parent. Caretaker and Mother appeal the adjudication and disposition. This summary discusses the dismissal of the partner’s appeal due to lack of standing. Mother’s appeal proceeded and is summarized separately.
“Standing is a threshold issue that must be addressed, and found to exist, before the merits of the case are judicially resolved.” Sl. Op. at 6 (citation omitted). The appealing party invoking the court’s jurisdiction has the burden of establishing standing.
G.S. 7B-1001(a)(3) provides for the direct appeal of any initial disposition order and the adjudication order on which it is based. G.S. 7B-1002 limits the right to appeal under G.S. 7B-1001 to the juvenile; the juvenile’s guardian ad litem (GAL); DSS; a nonprevailing parent, guardian, or custodian; or party that sought but failed to obtain a termination of parental rights.
“[A] ‘father’ is the male parent of a child, whether as a biological parent, by adoption, by legitimation, or by adjudication of paternity.” Sl. Op. at 9 (quoting the court’s recent opinion, Green v. Carter, ___ N.C. App. ___ (March 19, 2024); interpreting the meaning of the terms “father” and “parent” in the context of G.S. Chapter 50). The court notes that the terms “father” and “parent” as used in G.S. Chapter 50 are indistinguishable from the terms as used in G.S. Chapter 7B, which does not define the terms.
G.S. 130A-101 allows a mother who is unmarried at all times from conception to the child’s birth and the person believed to be the child’s natural father to execute an affidavit of parentage in order to list the declaring father on the child’s birth certificate, creating a rebuttable presumption of paternity. “But there can be no presumption, rebuttable or otherwise, of paternity for a woman.” Sl. Op. at 12. Paternity does not apply to a woman; maternity does.
In this situation, Caretaker would not be able to adopt the juvenile under North Carolina law and become a parent unless Mother and any potential biological father’s parental rights were terminated (citing Boseman v. Jarrell, 365 N.C. 537 (2010)).
Despite treating Caretaker as the child’s father (including appointing counsel which is only authorized for parents), “the trial court had no authority to create a new method of establishing paternity or Respondent-Caretaker’s status as a parent, without compliance with North Carolina’s statutes.” Sl. Op. at 8. Mother’s female partner cannot become a “father” under North Carolina law by listing her name on the juvenile’s birth certificate. Even had Mother and her partner falsely declared the partner as the juvenile’s natural father, Mother testified at the adjudication hearing that her partner is not the juvenile’s biological father and identified a potential natural father of the juvenile.
A caretaker is “any person other than a parent, guardian, or custodian who has responsibility for the health and welfare of a juvenile in a residential setting[,]” including an adult member of the juvenile’s household or an adult entrusted with the juvenile’s care. Sl. Op. at 8, quoting G.S. 7B-101(3).
Respondent’s status is that of a caretaker and not a father or parent of the juvenile. There is also no evidence in the record that Mother’s partner was appointed as the juvenile’s legal guardian or custodian. Therefore, Caretaker does not have standing to appeal the orders.