In the Matter of J. J. J., Minor,
718 P.2d 948 (1986)


Procedure: Appellant biological father challenged the order of the Superior Court of the State of Alaska, Third Judicial District, Anchorage, which reversed the master's determination that it was not in the minor child's best interests that an adoption by the child's stepfather to be granted over the biological father's objections and without the biological father's consent.


Facts: The child's biological parents were divorced and W got custody. H was ordered to pay $200 per month support and made no payments until three months later and men made a single payment and men no payments mere after. Eventually $1,000 of his wages were garnished and even after mat he continued to pay nothing toward his son's support. In 1983, W and HI wanted to adopt the child and informed H. Shortly before the adoption proceeding, H and his new wife paid$l,800in child support arrearages but only after being contacted by the enforcement agency. H had almost no contact with his son but had informed W twice mat he now wanted to visit his son. W had resisted H's request for unsupervised visitation after having no contact for such a long period of time. H refused consent to adoption by HI. The magistrate found mat H had failed to support his son for one year and had thus lost his right to withhold consent to the adoption. The magistrate also found mat the adoption would not be in the boy's best interests as he was curious about his father.

Issue:

Does the evidence support the master's finding that parental consent was unnecessary because for at least a 12-month period the biological father failed significantly and without justifiable cause to provide support as required by judicial decree?

If it is in the child's best interests to grant the adoption, may the biological parent on a proper showing be granted enforceable visitation rights?

Holding: Yes. No. Reversed in part.
The period of at least one year of significant nonsupport is not limited to the year immediately preceding the adoption petition. One year is the minimum period that may be considered. A parent's entire support history must be considered in determining whether the parent has waived his right to withhold consent. Sporadic partial payments do not preclude a finding of significant nonsupport. Support payments must be regular and constitute a material factor of support. The evidence supports the finding that D's consent was unnecessary.

Analysis: The adoptive father sought to adopt the minor child. The superior court sustained the master's finding that the biological father's consent was unnecessary, but overturned the finding that an award of the decree of adoption was not in the child's best interest as clearly erroneous. The court also concluded that the adoption should be granted and that the biological father could be afforded visitation rights. The biological father appealed. The court affirmed the superior court's order but for that part of the order dealing with visitation.