The required consent to adoption shall be executed at any time after the birth of the child and in the manner following:
If by the individual to be adopted, in the presence of the court;
If by an agency, by the executive head or other authorized representative, in the presence of a person authorized to take acknowledgments;
If by any other person, in the presence of the court or in the presence of a person authorized to take acknowledgments;
If by a court, by appropriate order or certificate.
A consent which does not name or otherwise identify the adopting parent is valid if the consent contains a statement by the person whose consent it is that the person consenting voluntarily executed the consent irrespective of disclosure of the name or other identification of the adopting parent.
If the parent is a minor, the writing shall be signed by a court-ordered guardian ad litem, who has been appointed by a judge of a court of record in this state to appear on behalf of the minor parent for the purpose of executing consent. The signing shall be made in the presence of an authorized representative of the Arkansas licensed placement agency taking custody of the child, or in the presence of a notary public, or in the presence and with the approval of a judge of a court of record of this state or any other state in which the minor was present at the time it was signed.
Survey — Family Law, 11 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 215.
Survey — Family Law, 13 U. Ark. Little Rock L.J. 369.
Case Notes
Construction.
This section and § 9-9-220 are mutually exclusive, in that they address separate methods by which a child may be adopted and provide different means by which the relinquishment of consent or direct consent may be withdrawn. In re Parsons, 302 Ark. 427, 791 S.W.2d 681 (1990).
This section and § 9-9-209 are mutually exclusive from § 9-9-220 in obtaining the relinquishment of consent or consent to an adoption, and either one or the other should be employed based on the applicable circumstances of the adoption; and the use of both relinquishment of parental rights and consent provisions in the affidavit and consent of natural mother document was in contravention of these sections. In re Parsons, 302 Ark. 427, 791 S.W.2d 681 (1990).
Where both relinquishment of parental rights and consent provisions were contained in the same document purporting to sanction the adoption of a minor child and the trial court included the ten day right to withdraw provision in its decree of adoption, the document was, in the main, a relinquishment of parental rights as embodied in § 9-9-220, and natural mother's revocation of her relinquishment five days after she signed the affidavit was effective. In re Parsons, 302 Ark. 427, 791 S.W.2d 681 (1990).
Local rule imposed by chancellor blending the different statutory consent requirements of this section and § 9-9-220 was inappropriate. In re Parsons, 302 Ark. 427, 791 S.W.2d 681 (1990).
Visitation Agreement.
An agreement to provide for visitation rights for a member of the natural parent's family as a basis for natural father's consent to an adoption in the absence of statute is against public policy and void and unenforceable. Poe v. Case, 263 Ark. 488, 565 S.W.2d 612 (1978).
Cited:
Brown v. Meekins, 282 Ark. 186, 666 S.W.2d 710 (1984).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: Matter of Adoption of Parsons, 791 S.W.2d 681 (Ark. 1990).
Matter of Adoption of Parsons, 791 S.W.2d 681 (Ark. 1990). · cites it 26דI agree with the majority's interpretation of Ark.Code Ann. § 9-9-208 (1987), consent for adoption, and Ark.”
Reid v. Frazee, 41 S.W.3d 397 (Ark. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 6ד1993) and had no power to schedule the subsequent hearing where he ascertained the child’s consent to adoption; and (3) the trial court failed to notify the minor child of his right to withdraw consent as required by Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208 (Repl. 1993). Appellant’s second…”
Martin v. Martin, 875 S.W.2d 819 (Ark. 1994). · cites it 8ד” Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208 (a)(3) (Repl. 1993) (emphasis added).”
Dougan v. Gray, 884 S.W.2d 239 (Ark. 1994). · cites it 2דArk. Code Ann. § 9-9-208 (b). The natural mother should have named the adoptive parents in her consent document, or she should have stated she did not know who would adopt by voluntarily consenting without disclosure of the names.”
Ducharme v. Gregory, 2014 Ark. App. 268, 435 S.W.3d 14. · cites it 2דOur state statutes distinguish between two 17methods by which a child may be adopted: 1) the relinquishment of the right to consent to adoption to a third party, embodied in Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-220, and 2) direct consent to adoption by an individual, embodied in…”
Bridges v. Bush, 220 S.W.3d 259 (Ark. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 4ד” The court also held that the consents were in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208 (a)(1) (Repl. 2002), which requires consents to be executed in the presence of the court or in the presence of the person authorized to take acknowledgements.”
Adoption of D.N.T. v. R.D.H., 843 So. 2d 690 (Miss. 2003). “”); Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208 (2002) (“If the parent is a minor, the writing shall be signed by a court-ordered guardian ad li-tem, who has been appointed by a judge of a court of record in this state to appear on behalf of the minor parent for the purpose of executing consent.”
In the Matter of the Adoption of E.R., K.R., & G.R., Minors, 2020 Ark. App. 418. · cites it 4דHe also pleaded that Danielle’s consent was not required pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-208(a)(1) and Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-208(a)(2) as she had failed, without just cause, to provide reasonable support and to maintain regular contact with the…”
Thompson v. Brunck, 545 S.W.3d 830 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3דThat option is in section 9-9-220, which partly states: (a) With the exception of the duty to pay child support, the rights of a parent with reference to a child, including parental right to control the child or to withhold consent to an adoption, may be relinquished and the…”
Joshua & Tamara Dixon v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., 2024 Ark. App. 428. · cites it 2דIf the 2 Pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-208(a) (Supp. 2023), the consent of an agency, such as DHS, shall be executed “by the executive head or other authorized representative, in the presence of a person authorized to take acknowledgments.”
Gray v. Gladney Ctr., 87 S.W.3d 797 (Ark. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2דArk. Code Ann. § 9-9-208 (c) (Repl. 2002).”
Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208(a): 1 case
Joshua & Tamara Dixon v. Arkansas Dep't of Human Servs., 2024 Ark. App. 428. “If the 2 Pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-208(a) (Supp. 2023), the consent of an agency, such as DHS, shall be executed “by the executive head or other authorized representative, in the presence of a person authorized to take acknowledgments.”
Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208(a)(1): 2 cases
Bridges v. Bush, 220 S.W.3d 259 (Ark. Ct. App. 2005). “” The court also held that the consents were in violation of Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208 (a)(1) (Repl. 2002), which requires consents to be executed in the presence of the court or in the presence of the person authorized to take acknowledgements.”
In the Matter of the Adoption of E.R., K.R., & G.R., Minors, 2020 Ark. App. 418. “He also pleaded that Danielle’s consent was not required pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-208(a)(1) and Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-208(a)(2) as she had failed, without just cause, to provide reasonable support and to maintain regular contact with the…”
Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208(a)(2): 1 case
In the Matter of the Adoption of E.R., K.R., & G.R., Minors, 2020 Ark. App. 418. “He also pleaded that Danielle’s consent was not required pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-208(a)(1) and Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-9-208(a)(2) as she had failed, without just cause, to provide reasonable support and to maintain regular contact with the…”
Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208(a)(3): 1 case
Martin v. Martin, 875 S.W.2d 819 (Ark. 1994). “” Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-208 (a)(3) (Repl. 1993) (emphasis added).”
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.