The custody battle in the case of an American Indian girl continues to drag on despite a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of her adoptive parents over the objections of her biological father, who is a Cherokee Indian. Despite the decision of the nation’s highest court, the biological father who voluntarily terminated his parental rights prior to the child’s birth refuses to comply with the ruling of the court. The father, Dustin Brown, continues to fight extradition to South Carolina on felony charges of custodial interference rather than return the child to Matt and Melanie Capobianco, the adoptive parents with whom Veronica spent the first 27 months of her life.
Although it looked like the U.S. Supreme Court decision in favor of the adoptive parents would resolve the issues in the case involving the adoption of the Native American child, the dispute shows the importance of sound legal advice and representation at all stages of the adoption process. The 5-4 ruling of the court held that a federal statute designed to prevent the breakup of Indian families did not apply in a case where the father had previously relinquished his parental rights prior to the birth of the child, and the biological mother consented to the adoption. Mr. Brown had relied on the National Indian Child Welfare Act in his successful appeal to the South Carolina Supreme Court arguing that the statute entitled him to retain custody of Veronica. The decision by South Carolina’s highest court granting custody to Mr. Brown was issued while the Capobianco adoption was still pending.
This case is especially difficult because both the biological father and the adoptive parents have purportedly provided a positive loving home environment for the girl. The adoptive parents indicate that they are prepared to permit the biological father to continue to have contact with the girl, but the refusal of the biological father to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in the Copabianco’s favor is straining the amicable nature of their attitude. The adoptive parents have not been able to see Veronica for two years.
This issues in this adoption have become so intense and have received so much media attention that the governors of Oklahoma, where Brown remains with the child, and the governor of South Carolina, where the adoptive parents reside, have become involved in the dispute. South Carolina Governor Nikki R. Haley has formally submitted an extradition request for Brown on felony charges of custodial interference, but Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin has indicated she will not take any action until Brown has an opportunity to contest extradition at a hearing.
The complex legal maneuvers in this case provide a cautionary tale to parents who are considering the prospect of confronting the adoption process without legal representation. While complications can arise even when adoptive parents are represented by a qualified and experienced Kansas adoption attorney, there are a wide range of advantages to obtaining legal counsel and representation. An adoption attorney can advise you regarding any particular challenges that you may face and take affirmative action to reduce the risk of potential problems.
Wichita, KS adoption attorney Thomas C. McDowell has been practicing law for over two decades. We provide legal representation in agency, foreign and step-parent adoption. Call us today at (316) 269-0746.
