Sec. 2. A court may grant postadoption contact
privileges if:
(1) the court determines that the best interests of the child would
be served by granting postadoption contact privileges;
(2) the child is at least two (2) years of age and the court finds that
there is a significant emotional attachment between the child and
the birth parent;
(3) each adoptive parent consents to the granting of postadoption
contact privileges;
(4) the adoptive parents and the birth parents:
(A) execute a postadoption contact agreement; and
(B) file the agreement with the court;
(5) the licensed child placing agency sponsoring the adoption and
the child's court appointed special advocate or guardian ad litem
appointed under IC 31-32-3 recommends to the court the
postadoption contact agreement, or if there is no licensed child
placing agency sponsoring the adoption, the local office or other
agency that prepared an adoption report under IC 31-19-8-5 is
informed of the contents of the postadoption contact agreement
and comments on the agreement in the agency's report to the
court;
(6) consent to postadoption contact is obtained from the child if
the child is at least twelve (12) years of age; and
(7) the postadoption contact agreement is approved by the court.
[Pre-1997 Recodification Citation: 31-3-1-13(b).]
As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.11. Amended by P.L.196-1997,
SEC.5; P.L.128-2012, SEC.57.
Notes of Decisions
In re Visitation of AR, 723 N.E.2d 476 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 19× “Whether Ind.Code § 31-19-16-2 provides the exclusive means of asserting visitation rights by a biological parent who has consented to adoption.”
J.S. v. J.D., 941 N.E.2d 1107 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 22× “("[Wle do not believe that the legislature intended that a birth parent's failure to comply with Ind. Code § 31-19-16-2 , resulting in the forfeiture of his or her newly-created right to post-adoption contact, should subsequently act as a means for that birth parent, under the…”
Black v. Howard Cnty. Dep't of Child Servs., 896 N.E.2d 1 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008).
· cites it 9× “The Addendum exclusively addresses post[-]adoption visitation rights pursuant to Ind.Code 31-19-16-2. [Mother] has provided no competent evidence of a probative value that [HCDCS] made false statements regarding [Mother’s] rights to have visitation continue after the termination…”
T.B. v. Indiana Dep't of Child Servs., 921 N.E.2d 494 (Ind. 2009).
· cites it 12× “Indiana Code § 31-19-16-2 states: A court may grant postadoption privileges if: (1) the court determines that the best interests of the child would be served.”
Walker v. Campbell, 711 N.E.2d 42 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
· cites it 3× “CODE § 31-19-16-2(2). In the present case, Father neither consented to the adoption nor voluntarily terminated the parent-child relationship.”
In re the Adoption of K.S.P., 804 N.E.2d 1253 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004).
“§ 31-19-16-2. 4 . In a lengthy opinion, which included a strong dissent, a majority of the Connecticut Supreme Court held that the state's adoption laws did not permit a child with a natural or adoptive legal parent to be adopted by a second person other than that parent's…”
In re Marriage of JS & JD, 941 N.E.2d 1107 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 28× “("[W]e do not believe that the legislature intended that a birth parent's failure to comply with Ind. Code § 31-19-16-2 , resulting in the forfeiture of his or her newly-created right to post-adoption contact, should subsequently act as a means for that birth parent, under the…”
Sexton v. Rowe, 723 N.E.2d 476 (Ind. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 17× “Whether Ind.Code § 31-19-16-2 provides the exclusive means of asserting visitation rights by a biological parent who has consented to adoption.”
In re MB, 921 N.E.2d 494 (Ind. 2009).
· cites it 14× “Indiana Code § 31-19-16-2 states: A court may grant postadoption privileges if: (1) the court determines that the best interests of the child would be served by granting postadoption contact privileges; (2) the child is at least two (2) years of age and the court finds that…”
J.P. & J.P. v. J.M. & S.M., No. 19A-AD-93 (Ind. Ct. App. June 27, 2019).
· cites it 2× “See Ind. Code § 31-19-16-2 (3) (stating that post- adoption visitations would require, among other things, the consent of the adoptive parents).”
Ind. Code § 31-19-16-2(1): 2 cases
T.B. v. Indiana Dep't of Child Servs., 921 N.E.2d 494 (Ind. 2009).
“Indiana Code § 31-19-16-2 states: A court may grant postadoption privileges if: (1) the court determines that the best interests of the child would be served.”
In re MB, 921 N.E.2d 494 (Ind. 2009).
“Indiana Code § 31-19-16-2 states: A court may grant postadoption privileges if: (1) the court determines that the best interests of the child would be served by granting postadoption contact privileges; (2) the child is at least two (2) years of age and the court finds that…”
Ind. Code § 31-19-16-2(2): 1 case
Walker v. Campbell, 711 N.E.2d 42 (Ind. Ct. App. 1999).
“CODE § 31-19-16-2(2). In the present case, Father neither consented to the adoption nor voluntarily terminated the parent-child relationship.”
Ind. Code § 31-19-16-2(8): 1 case
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.