In Re PB for Adoption of LC
392 N.J. Super. 190, 920 A.2d 155 (2006)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
An adult adoption will not be granted when the statutorily-required minimum age difference of ten years between the adopter and adoptee is not satisfied, unless the court finds compelling evidence that the adoption would promote the adoptee's 'best interests' by formalizing a pre-existing parent-child relationship or addressing specific practical needs like inheritance or perpetual care.
Facts:
- P.B. (50) and S.B. (53) are a married couple residing in a two-bedroom mobile home and are childless.
- L.C. (52) is an unmarried, disabled female who has resided with P.B. and S.B. for over ten years.
- L.C. has been married twice previously, has a troubled relationship with her birth parents and siblings, and has no valuable personal property.
- P.B., S.B., and L.C. describe their relationship as operating as a 'team' of three equals and express a desire to formalize their familial relationship through adoption and for L.C. to change her last name to theirs.
- The parties do not seek the adoption for inheritance, tax purposes, or to ensure perpetual care, but rather to make their 'family unit' official in the eyes of the law.
- S.B. and L.C. share a bedroom, and the parties are assumed to have a platonic relationship.
- The prospective adoptive parents (P.B. and S.B.) are not at least ten years older than the adoptee (L.C.), with P.B. being two years younger than L.C.
Procedural Posture:
- P.B. and S.B., a married couple, filed a petition to adopt L.C., an adult.
- The Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Family Part, Cumberland County, held an adoption hearing on July 14, 2006, where the parties testified.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a court have the authority to waive the statutory ten-year age difference requirement for an adult adoption when the parties seek merely to formalize their existing emotional bond as a 'family unit' of equals, rather than establishing a parent-child relationship or fulfilling practical needs such as inheritance or perpetual care?
Opinions:
Majority - Julio L. Mendez, P.J.F.P.
No, a court does not have the authority to waive the statutory ten-year age difference requirement for an adult adoption simply to formalize an existing emotional bond among adults who see themselves as a 'family unit' of equals, without evidence of a parent-child relationship or other compelling 'best interests' such as inheritance or perpetual care. The court noted that adoption is purely statutory and must adhere to legislative intent. New Jersey statute N.J.S.A. 2A:22-2 requires a ten-year age difference between adopting parents and the adoptee, though it allows for waiver if the 'best interests of the person to be adopted would be promoted.' The court interpreted the legislative intent behind the age difference requirement, informed by the principle of 'adoptio naturam imitatur' (adoption imitates nature), as ensuring a 'semblance of a parent-child relationship.' While prior New Jersey case law, such as In the Matter of the Estate of Maria Fenton, suggests limited inquiry into motives when statutory requirements are met, this case presents a request for waiver of a core requirement. In such waiver cases, the court must inquire into the existence of a parent-child relationship to determine if 'best interests' are met, akin to New York's approach in In the Matter of the Adoption of Robert Paul P. where an incompatible relationship precluded adoption. Here, the parties presented themselves as a 'team of equals' and did not characterize their relationship as parent-child. Furthermore, the stated motivations for adoption were solely to formalize an emotional bond, explicitly excluding inheritance, tax, or perpetual care, thus failing to demonstrate any other compelling reason to promote L.C.'s 'best interests' under the statute. The court emphasized that denying the adoption does not diminish the parties' emotional relationship or prevent other legal avenues for name change or testamentary provisions.
Analysis:
This case significantly clarifies the interpretation of the 'best interests' standard for waiving the statutory age difference in adult adoptions in New Jersey. It establishes that merely desiring to formalize an emotional bond or 'family unit' among adults who relate as equals is insufficient. The ruling reinforces the idea that adult adoption, even with a waiver, should generally reflect the traditional parent-child relationship or serve clear practical benefits (like inheritance or care) that promote the adoptee's welfare. This precedent discourages the use of adult adoption as a 'quasi-matrimonial vehicle' or a means to legitimize unconventional familial structures outside of the core intent of the adoption statutes, thereby limiting the discretion of courts in granting such waivers.
