An ongoing case in the North Carolina Supreme Court is considering issues of “second parent” adoptions and the rights of biological parents when relationships dissolve.
The custody case is reviewing whether or not Melissa Jarrell has grounds to revoke the parental privileges of her former domestic partner, said state Senator Julia Boseman. A District Court judge approved Boseman’s request to adopt Jarell’s biological son in 2005, but the couple split in 2008 and were awarded joint custody of 8-year-old Jacob.
Jarrell argues, however, that the adoption was not valid in the first place. Boseman, who holds the ninth district Senate seat but is not seeking reelection this year, is arguing that because Jarrell had previously consented to the adoption, she should not be able to annul the original decision.
“Statutory limitations can only void adoptions within 30 days of the adoption,” said Jim Lea, Boseman’s lawyer. “Jarrell agreed to the adoption and is now trying to use the same courts to overturn the adoption. Courts can’t submit different rulings.”
In legal terms, seeking the annulment of a conclusion a party previously found satisfactory is referred to as “estoppel equitable,” said Kathy Bradley, professor of the practice in the School of Law. Previous court rulings can only be annulled if there are legal grounds for its reversal, and in this case there may not be, she said.
“One of the arguments is whether this should be a court case at all,” Bradley said. “Why should we allow her to come back and try to undo something she tried to do?”
Bradley said in her opinion Boseman should win the case. The court is using the conflict as an opportunity to look at the scope of the state’s adoption statues, she added, which do not specifically permit or exclude “second parent” adoptions for gay couples.
John Martin, a lawyer who is working on the case with Jarrell’s lawyer, Leslie Fritscher, said the two primary issues in the case are the constitutionally protected status of the natural parent under the due process clause and the separation of powers under the Constitution.
The pivotal case could decide whether same-sex adoptions can take place if one of the partners is the biological parent of the child. Lea said if the case is overturned, it would set a precedent for other “second parent” adoption cases for gay couples.
Martin said although the media has portrayed this as a case about gay rights, it applies more broadly to adoption law.
Throughout the legal proceedings, though, Bradley noted that the human elements of this case are essential to keep in mind.
“Second parent adoptions are perfectly fine and great for the kids. The courts should concentrate on what it means to be a family and what it means to be a parent [as well],” she said.
It can be easy to forget the humanity of the case and concentrate too much on the legality of it, said senior Michelle Sohn, Duke Student Government liason for gender studies and a member of The Chronicle’s editorial board.
“It’s a pretty heart-wrenching case for both sides about a kid and a family.”
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.