A. All consents to adoption shall be in writing and signed by the person giving the consent and witnessed by two or more credible witnesses who are at least eighteen years of age and who subscribe their names in the presence of the person giving the consent or shall be acknowledged by the person giving consent before a notary public.
B. A consent given before seventy-two hours after the birth of the child is invalid.
C. The consent shall be dated, shall sufficiently identify and give the addresses of the party giving the consent and the name and address of the witness or witnesses and shall sufficiently identify the child to whose adoption the consent is given.
D. The consent shall designate either of the following:
1. An agency or the division as authorized by the party giving the consent to place the child for adoption.
2. The particular person or persons authorized to adopt the child by the person giving the consent.
E. The true names of the adopting person or persons shall be used, except that fictitious names may be used if the consent also truthfully states that the adopting person or persons are currently certified as acceptable to adopt the child, that the consenting party knows that the names used are fictitious and does not wish to know the true names and that the consenting party has been furnished with all information which the consenting party wishes to know about the adopting person or persons.
F. The consent shall contain a statement which includes the following:
1. The consequences of the consent pursuant to section 8-117.
2. The irrevocability of the consent pursuant to section 8-106.
3. The prohibition of any direct or indirect compensation for the consent except as provided in section 8-114.
G. A consent other than to any agency or the division which does not designate a particular person or persons, or which purports to permit a third person to locate or nominate an adoptive parent, is invalid.
Notes of Decisions
In Re the Appeal in Pima Cnty. Juv. Severance Action No. S-2698, 806 P.2d 892 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 10× “ISSUES On appeal the agency raises the following issues: (1) the juvenile court erred in concluding that A.R.S. § 8-107 requires that the parties must intend a consent to adoption be irrevocable; (2) the juvenile court erroneously concluded that the consent was void ab initio;…”
Matter of Petrie, 742 P.2d 796 (Ariz. 1987).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 8-107(B). The statute protects the right of the natural parents to withhold a decision on whether to keep the baby until after the baby is born.”
In Re the Appeal in Navajo Cnty. Juv. Action No. JA-691, 831 P.2d 368 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 4× “§ 8-106, this court stated the general rule as follows: We thus conclude that once a valid written consent to adopt has been given and the adoption process has begun, a parent may not revoke that consent unless there is a showing of some compelling reason for the revocation.”
In Re Adoption of Luke, 414 P.2d 176 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1966).
· cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 8-107. The interlocutory order is provisional only and may be vacated prior to entry of the final order, and until entry of the final order, the child is a ward of the court.”
Anonymous v. Anonymous, 530 P.2d 896 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1975).
· cites it 2× “The relevant statute as to time of execution and requisites of consent to adoption is A.R.S. § 8-107, which states in pertinent part: “A.”
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty. Juv. Action No. JD-500116, 774 P.2d 842 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1989).
“The child’s parent or guardian unless the parental rights of such parent or guardian have been terminated by court action or unless the parent has relinquished rights to the child to an agency or has consented to the adoption of the child as provided in § 8-107. 4. The foster…”
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa Cnty., Juv. Action No. J-57445, 691 P.2d 1116 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984).
“The child’s parent or guardian unless the parental rights of such parent or guardian have been terminated by court action or unless the parent has relinquished rights to the child to an agency or has consented to the adoption of the child as provided in § 8-107. "4. The foster…”
Hunt v. Molloy, 414 P.2d 176 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1966).
· cites it 4× “A.R.S. § 8-107. The interlocutory order is provisional only and may be vacated prior to entry of the final order, and until entry of the final order, the child is a ward of the court.”
Acedo v. State, Dep't of Pub. Welfare, 513 P.2d 1350 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1973).
· cites it 2× “” As to the time of execution and contents of the consent, A.R.S. § 8-107 provides: “A. All consents to adoption shall be in writing and signed by the person giving the consent and witnessed by two or more credible witnesses who are at least eighteen years of age and who…”
Jena H. v. Todd H. (Ariz. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 2× “The juvenile court denied the motion because it found a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the Notice complied with A.R.S. § 8-107 (2016) (providing requirements for consents to adoption).”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-107(B) — 2 cases
Matter of Petrie, 742 P.2d 796 (Ariz. 1987).
“A.R.S. § 8-107(B). The statute protects the right of the natural parents to withhold a decision on whether to keep the baby until after the baby is born.”
In Re the Appeal in Pima Cnty. Juv. Severance Action No. S-2698, 806 P.2d 892 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990).
“ISSUES On appeal the agency raises the following issues: (1) the juvenile court erred in concluding that A.R.S. § 8-107 requires that the parties must intend a consent to adoption be irrevocable; (2) the juvenile court erroneously concluded that the consent was void ab initio;…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-107(F) — 1 case
In Re the Appeal in Pima Cnty. Juv. Severance Action No. S-2698, 806 P.2d 892 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990).
“ISSUES On appeal the agency raises the following issues: (1) the juvenile court erred in concluding that A.R.S. § 8-107 requires that the parties must intend a consent to adoption be irrevocable; (2) the juvenile court erroneously concluded that the consent was void ab initio;…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.