She is three and he has NEVER supported her in anyway. And has not even seen or spoken to us in 2 years. He at one time agreed to give up his rights. But now I can't find him. Iam married and He is the only father she knows and he wants to adopt her.

You can't take away his rights. He either as to relinquish them in favor of the adoption or you need a court to find grounds to terminate his rights.

You need an attorney to handle the adoption for you.

6 MONTHS NO CONTACT NO COMMUNICATION = ABANDONMENT
I went through the same thing. That's the law for MINNESOTA and IDAHO

6 MONTHS NO CONTACT NO COMMUNICATION = ABANDONMENT
I went through the same thing. That's the law for MINNESOTA and IDAHO


I am glad it worked for you, but remember that in some places, no contact and no support is not grounds for anything.

After that, we don't even know if there is proof of paternity, if they are on the birth certificate, also is there a child support order, is there a custody order ? If there is not a support order, there is no requirement of payment.

In general, no, rights can not be taken away merely for that, if the other parent does not fight the adoption, of if they will agree to it, is one issue, but it is far from a done deal merely because of no contact

6 MONTHS NO CONTACT NO COMMUNICATION = ABANDONMENT
I went through the same thing. That's the law for MINNESOTA and IDAHO

After looking at the law in Minn can you explain the circumstances that lead to this? Id like to see if the law was followed.

6 MONTHS NO CONTACT NO COMMUNICATION = ABANDONMENT
I went through the same thing. That's the law for MINNESOTA and IDAHO

Please cite these laws you refer to. I don't know what you went through since you didn't see fit to explain, but I doubt if it contradicts what we have said here.

True! I had to have all that done before I could do anything. She needs to see a lawyer and ask the right questions then go from there.

Comment on Fr_Chuck's post
True! I had to have all that done before I could do anything. She needs to see a lawyer and ask the right questions then go from there.

So, in other words, you are admitting that your previous post in this thread (#3) was misinformation and not helpful to the OP. In that case, why did you bother posting?

Under the Minnesota statutes on maltreatment of minors, a child is considered abandoned if the parent has had no regular contact with the child and has not "demonstrated consistent interest in the child's well-being for six months,"

Abandonment takes place where there is an intention to forsake the duties of parenthood. In re Welfare of L.A.F. 554 N.W.2d 393, 398 (Minn.App.1996). The Court may infer this intention when a parent fails to visit a child, refuses to accept responsibility for the child, and a fails to provide financial or emotional support to the child.

Failure to Provide Parental Support. Rights may be terminated when there is clear and convincing evidence that a parent has substantially and repeatedly neglected to comply with the duties of a parent such as the duty to provide necessary food, clothing, shelter, education, and other care necessary for the child's physical, mental, or emotional health and development. This only applies if the parent has failed to provide support without good cause. In other words, parental rights cannot be terminated if the parent is physically and financially unable to provide support.

Failure to Provide Financial Support. Rights may be terminated when a parent has been ordered to pay child support or to financially aid in the child's birth and has continuously failed to do so despite having the financial ability to do so.

In the case entitled In re Welfare of All, 304 Minn. 254, 230 N.W.2d 574 (1975), the Minnesota Supreme Court examined the purpose and intent of the statute to determine when good cause could be found. The purpose of the statute is:

* First, to enable the judicial system to legally remove a child from a destructive or unhealthy home environment without the consent of the natural parents, and,
* second, to facilitate adoption procedures by providing a means by which existing parental rights may be voluntarily terminated.

In light of these purposes, the Minnesota Courts of Appeals have consistently ruled that a voluntary termination of parental rights for reasons other than to facilitate adoption works a substantial detrimental effect on a child, who will be forced to look solely to his custodial parent to meet all of his needs. See Matter of Welfare of J.D.N. 504 N.W.2d 54, 58 (Minn.App.1993).

I got pregnant with my daughter in 97, I was engaged to him. He liked to drink, one night he came home and started acting weird. I just got done taking a bath and I wasn't fulling dressed, just a long shirt on. I was 7 months pregnant at the time. He tried to throw me out of the house, I grabbed a chair so he couldn't, in which my toe got broke. I grabbed the phone and tried to call 911, I couldn't because he ripped the cord out of the jack. I went to the bed room and finished getting dressed, he didn't see me grab the other phone. I managed to call 911, he came in the bed room and asked who I was talking too. I lied and said his mom. He then went and pulled that cord too. I don't remember how but he got me out of the house and locked me out. It was winter and I didn't have nothing but my clothes on. I walked to my land lords house and knocked on his door, I went in and he went to get his phone, called 911 again and told them what was going on.

I got pregnant with my daughter in 97, I was engaged to him. He liked to drink, one night he came home and started acting weird. I just got done taking a bath and I wasn't fulling dressed, just a long shirt on. I was 7 months pregnant at the time. He tried to throw me out of the house, I grabbed a chair so he couldn't, in which my toe got broke. I grabbed the phone and tried to call 911, I couldn't because he ripped the cord out of the jack. I went to the bed room and finished getting dressed, he didn't see me grab the other phone. I managed to call 911, he came in the bed room and asked who I was talking too. I lied and said his mom. He then went and pulled that cord too. I don't remember how but he got me out of the house and locked me out. It was winter and I didn't have nothing but my clothes on. I walked to my land lords house and knocked on his door, I went in and he went to get his phone, called 911 again and told them what was going on.

Ok, So what has this got to do with the OP's situation? I don't see ANY similarity. Nor have you provided any cites to statutes (like we have) to support what you said.

We take pride in the accuracy of the advice we give here. Please do not offer advice unless you are sure it is accurate and applies to the questions being asked. If you want help with your situation please start a new thread on your own. Please do not further hijack this thread with your situation.

{Edit-I removed your last post. It still has no bearing on the OP's case and does nothing to justify your response to the OP.-<>}

After looking at the law in Minn can you explain the circumstances that lead to this? Id like to see if the law was followed.

260C.301 TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS.
Subdivision 1.Voluntary and involuntary.

The juvenile court may upon petition, terminate all rights of a parent to a child:

(a) with the written consent of a parent who for good cause desires to terminate parental rights; or

(b) if it finds that one or more of the following conditions exist:

(1) that the parent has abandoned the child;

Subd. 2.Evidence of abandonment.

For purposes of subdivision 1, clause (b), item (1):

(a) Abandonment is presumed when:

(1) the parent has had no contact with the child on a regular basis and not demonstrated consistent interest in the child's well-being for six months and the social services agency has made reasonable efforts to facilitate contact, unless the parent establishes that an extreme financial or physical hardship or treatment for mental disability or chemical dependency or other good cause prevented the parent from making contact with the child. This presumption does not apply to children whose custody has been determined under chapter 257 or 518; or

(2) the child is an infant under two years of age and has been deserted by the parent under circumstances that show an intent not to return to care for the child.

Unfortunately we do not know where the OP is located:(

260C.301 TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS.
Subdivision 1.Voluntary and involuntary.

The juvenile court may upon petition, terminate all rights of a parent to a child:

(a) with the written consent of a parent who for good cause desires to terminate parental rights; or

(b) if it finds that one or more of the following conditions exist:

(1) that the parent has abandoned the child;

Subd. 2.Evidence of abandonment.

For purposes of subdivision 1, clause (b), item (1):

(a) Abandonment is presumed when:

(1) the parent has had no contact with the child on a regular basis and not demonstrated consistent interest in the child's well-being for six months and the social services agency has made reasonable efforts to facilitate contact, unless the parent establishes that an extreme financial or physical hardship or treatment for mental disability or chemical dependency or other good cause prevented the parent from making contact with the child. This presumption does not apply to children whose custody has been determined under chapter 257 or 518; or

(2) the child is an infant under two years of age and has been deserted by the parent under circumstances that show an intent not to return to care for the child.

Unfortunately we do not know where the OP is located:(

Yep, that's why I asked for the OP's circumstances. The part in bold plus the other provisions of the law would show if it was actually followed or not. There is that little reunification clause that could stop a lot of it from going through.