Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 19-A
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891 (2026)

De facto parentage

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
1.  De facto parentage.  The court may adjudicate a person to be a de facto parent.  
[PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
2.  Standing to seek de facto parentage.  A person seeking to be adjudicated a de facto parent of a child under this subchapter must establish standing to maintain the action in accordance with the following.  
A. A person seeking to be adjudicated a de facto parent of a child shall file with the initial pleadings an affidavit alleging under oath specific facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child as set forth in subsection 3. The pleadings and affidavit must be served upon all parents and legal guardians of the child and any other party to the proceeding.   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
B. An adverse party, parent or legal guardian who files a pleading in response to the pleadings in paragraph A shall also file an affidavit in response, serving all parties to the proceeding with a copy.   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
C. The court shall determine on the basis of the pleadings and affidavits under paragraphs A and B whether the person seeking to be adjudicated a de facto parent has presented prima facie evidence of the requirements set forth in subsection 3. The court may in its sole discretion, if necessary and on an expedited basis, hold a hearing to determine disputed facts that are necessary and material to the issue of standing.   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
D. If the court's determination under paragraph C is in the affirmative, the party claiming de facto parentage has standing to proceed to adjudication under subsection 3.   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
[PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
3.  Adjudication of de facto parent status.  The court shall adjudicate a person to be a de facto parent if the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the person has fully and completely undertaken a permanent, unequivocal, committed and responsible parental role in the child's life. Such a finding requires a determination by the court that:  
A. The person has resided with the child for a significant period of time;   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
B. The person has engaged in consistent caretaking of the child;   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
C. A bonded and dependent relationship has been established between the child and the person, the relationship was fostered or supported by another parent of the child and the person and the other parent have understood, acknowledged or accepted that or behaved as though the person is a parent of the child;   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
D. The person has accepted full and permanent responsibilities as a parent of the child without expectation of financial compensation; and   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
E. The continuing relationship between the person and the child is in the best interest of the child.   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
[PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
4.  Orders.  The court may enter the following orders as appropriate.  
A. The court may enter an interim order concerning contact between a person with standing seeking adjudication under this subchapter as a de facto parent and the child.   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
B. Adjudication of a person under this subchapter as a de facto parent establishes parentage, and the court shall determine parental rights and responsibilities in accordance with section 1653. The court shall make appropriate orders for the financial support for the child in accordance with the child support guidelines under chapter 63. An order requiring the payment of support to or from a de facto parent does not relieve any other parent of the obligation to pay child support unless otherwise ordered by a court.   [PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
[PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
5.  Other parents.  The adjudication of a person under this subchapter as a de facto parent does not disestablish the parentage of any other parent.  
[PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW); PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. A, §1 (NEW). PL 2015, c. 296, Pt. D, §1 (AFF).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2015–2025 · leading case: Maureen D. Davis v. Bennie C. McGuire III, 2018 ME 72 (Me. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Maureen D. Davis v. Bennie C. McGuire III, 2018 ME 72 (Me. 2018). · cites it 17× “Standard of Proof to Establish Standing [¶ 13] Pursuant to the framework described both in our de facto parenthood decisions that predated the enactment of the MPA and now in the MPA itself, a party who files a complaint to be adjudicated a de facto parent of a child must make…”
Jason Young v. Toni M. King, 2019 ME 78 (Me. 2019). · cites it 18× “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). The procedure begins with a determination of standing pursuant to § 1891(2)(A)-(D), 5 which consists of a multi-step process.”
Mark R. Martin v. Marylou E. MacMahan, 2021 ME 62 (Me. 2021). · cites it 15× “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2) (2021); see also, e.”
Lamkin v. Lamkin, 186 A.3d 1276 (Me. 2018). · cites it 8× “In a recent opinion, we noted the differences between the elements of de facto parentage articulated in 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2017) and in our case law that predated the enactment of that statute.”
In re Child of Philip S., 2020 ME 2 (Me. 2020). · cites it 11× “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). They contend that the court erred in concluding, based on its findings of fact, that they lacked standing.”
Deborah E. Lamkin v. Corrie L. Lamkin, 2018 ME 76 (Me. 2018). · cites it 6× “9 In a recent opinion, we noted the differences between the elements of de facto parentage articulated in 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2017) and in our case law that predated the enactment of that statute.”
Timothy R. Libby v. Kyle Estabrook, 2020 ME 71 (Me. 2020). · cites it 18× “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2020). With his petition, Libby included an affidavit alleging facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child.”
Michelle A. Gardner v. Leslie Greenlaw, 2022 ME 53 (Me. 2022). · cites it 8× “on that the best interests determinations required in the guardianship actions and in the actions for de facto parentage are distinct determinations, we vacate the court’s judgment and remand the matter for the court to consider the grandmother’s standing with respect to her…”
Kateryna A. Bagrii v. John P. Campbell, 2025 ME 38 (Me. 2025). · cites it 21× “1 Although no party raises the issue, de facto parentage cases, see 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2025), are not among the case types in which a statute authorizes the appointment of a guardian ad litem.”
In re Child of Nicholas P., 2019 ME 152 (Me. 2019). “, 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2)(C) (“The court may in its sole discretion, if necessary and on an expedited basis, hold a hearing to determine disputed facts that are necessary and material to the issue of standing [to seek de facto parenthood].”
Timothy R. Libby v. Kyle Estabrook, 2020 ME 71 (Me. 2020). · cites it 18× “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2020). With his petition, Libby included an affidavit alleging facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child.”
Todd A. Kilborn v. Nicole Carey, 2016 ME 78 (Me. 2016). “” 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(3)(E) (2015); see Pitts, 2014 ME 59, ¶¶ 42-58 , 90 A.”
Show all 21 citing cases →
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(2) — 13 cases
Maureen D. Davis v. Bennie C. McGuire III, 2018 ME 72 (Me. 2018). “Standard of Proof to Establish Standing [¶ 13] Pursuant to the framework described both in our de facto parenthood decisions that predated the enactment of the MPA and now in the MPA itself, a party who files a complaint to be adjudicated a de facto parent of a child must make…”
Jason Young v. Toni M. King, 2019 ME 78 (Me. 2019). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). The procedure begins with a determination of standing pursuant to § 1891(2)(A)-(D), 5 which consists of a multi-step process.”
Lamkin v. Lamkin, 186 A.3d 1276 (Me. 2018). “In a recent opinion, we noted the differences between the elements of de facto parentage articulated in 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2017) and in our case law that predated the enactment of that statute.”
In re Child of Philip S., 2020 ME 2 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). They contend that the court erred in concluding, based on its findings of fact, that they lacked standing.”
Deborah E. Lamkin v. Corrie L. Lamkin, 2018 ME 76 (Me. 2018). “9 In a recent opinion, we noted the differences between the elements of de facto parentage articulated in 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2017) and in our case law that predated the enactment of that statute.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(2)(A) — 10 cases
Maureen D. Davis v. Bennie C. McGuire III, 2018 ME 72 (Me. 2018). “Standard of Proof to Establish Standing [¶ 13] Pursuant to the framework described both in our de facto parenthood decisions that predated the enactment of the MPA and now in the MPA itself, a party who files a complaint to be adjudicated a de facto parent of a child must make…”
Mark R. Martin v. Marylou E. MacMahan, 2021 ME 62 (Me. 2021). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2) (2021); see also, e.”
Jason Young v. Toni M. King, 2019 ME 78 (Me. 2019). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). The procedure begins with a determination of standing pursuant to § 1891(2)(A)-(D), 5 which consists of a multi-step process.”
Timothy R. Libby v. Kyle Estabrook, 2020 ME 71 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2020). With his petition, Libby included an affidavit alleging facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child.”
Timothy R. Libby v. Kyle Estabrook, 2020 ME 71 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2020). With his petition, Libby included an affidavit alleging facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(2)(C) — 12 cases
Jason Young v. Toni M. King, 2019 ME 78 (Me. 2019). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). The procedure begins with a determination of standing pursuant to § 1891(2)(A)-(D), 5 which consists of a multi-step process.”
Maureen D. Davis v. Bennie C. McGuire III, 2018 ME 72 (Me. 2018). “Standard of Proof to Establish Standing [¶ 13] Pursuant to the framework described both in our de facto parenthood decisions that predated the enactment of the MPA and now in the MPA itself, a party who files a complaint to be adjudicated a de facto parent of a child must make…”
In re Child of Nicholas P., 2019 ME 152 (Me. 2019). “, 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2)(C) (“The court may in its sole discretion, if necessary and on an expedited basis, hold a hearing to determine disputed facts that are necessary and material to the issue of standing [to seek de facto parenthood].”
Deborah E. Lamkin v. Corrie L. Lamkin, 2018 ME 76 (Me. 2018). “9 In a recent opinion, we noted the differences between the elements of de facto parentage articulated in 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2017) and in our case law that predated the enactment of that statute.”
Lamkin v. Lamkin, 186 A.3d 1276 (Me. 2018). “In a recent opinion, we noted the differences between the elements of de facto parentage articulated in 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2017) and in our case law that predated the enactment of that statute.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(2)(D) — 2 cases
Timothy R. Libby v. Kyle Estabrook, 2020 ME 71 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2020). With his petition, Libby included an affidavit alleging facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child.”
Timothy R. Libby v. Kyle Estabrook, 2020 ME 71 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2020). With his petition, Libby included an affidavit alleging facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(3) — 14 cases
Maureen D. Davis v. Bennie C. McGuire III, 2018 ME 72 (Me. 2018). “Standard of Proof to Establish Standing [¶ 13] Pursuant to the framework described both in our de facto parenthood decisions that predated the enactment of the MPA and now in the MPA itself, a party who files a complaint to be adjudicated a de facto parent of a child must make…”
Jason Young v. Toni M. King, 2019 ME 78 (Me. 2019). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). The procedure begins with a determination of standing pursuant to § 1891(2)(A)-(D), 5 which consists of a multi-step process.”
Deborah E. Lamkin v. Corrie L. Lamkin, 2018 ME 76 (Me. 2018). “9 In a recent opinion, we noted the differences between the elements of de facto parentage articulated in 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2017) and in our case law that predated the enactment of that statute.”
Lamkin v. Lamkin, 186 A.3d 1276 (Me. 2018). “In a recent opinion, we noted the differences between the elements of de facto parentage articulated in 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2017) and in our case law that predated the enactment of that statute.”
Mark R. Martin v. Marylou E. MacMahan, 2021 ME 62 (Me. 2021). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2) (2021); see also, e.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(3)(A) — 7 cases
Jason Young v. Toni M. King, 2019 ME 78 (Me. 2019). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). The procedure begins with a determination of standing pursuant to § 1891(2)(A)-(D), 5 which consists of a multi-step process.”
Maureen D. Davis v. Bennie C. McGuire III, 2018 ME 72 (Me. 2018). “Standard of Proof to Establish Standing [¶ 13] Pursuant to the framework described both in our de facto parenthood decisions that predated the enactment of the MPA and now in the MPA itself, a party who files a complaint to be adjudicated a de facto parent of a child must make…”
In re Child of Philip S., 2020 ME 2 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). They contend that the court erred in concluding, based on its findings of fact, that they lacked standing.”
Mark R. Martin v. Marylou E. MacMahan, 2021 ME 62 (Me. 2021). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2) (2021); see also, e.”
Kateryna A. Bagrii v. John P. Campbell, 2025 ME 38 (Me. 2025). “1 Although no party raises the issue, de facto parentage cases, see 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2025), are not among the case types in which a statute authorizes the appointment of a guardian ad litem.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(3)(B) — 3 cases
Lamkin v. Lamkin, 186 A.3d 1276 (Me. 2018). “In a recent opinion, we noted the differences between the elements of de facto parentage articulated in 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2017) and in our case law that predated the enactment of that statute.”
In re Child of Philip S., 2020 ME 2 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). They contend that the court erred in concluding, based on its findings of fact, that they lacked standing.”
Mark R. Martin v. Marylou E. MacMahan, 2021 ME 62 (Me. 2021). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2) (2021); see also, e.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(3)(C) — 8 cases
Mark R. Martin v. Marylou E. MacMahan, 2021 ME 62 (Me. 2021). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2) (2021); see also, e.”
Jason Young v. Toni M. King, 2019 ME 78 (Me. 2019). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). The procedure begins with a determination of standing pursuant to § 1891(2)(A)-(D), 5 which consists of a multi-step process.”
Timothy R. Libby v. Kyle Estabrook, 2020 ME 71 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2020). With his petition, Libby included an affidavit alleging facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child.”
In re Child of Philip S., 2020 ME 2 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). They contend that the court erred in concluding, based on its findings of fact, that they lacked standing.”
Kateryna A. Bagrii v. John P. Campbell, 2025 ME 38 (Me. 2025). “1 Although no party raises the issue, de facto parentage cases, see 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2025), are not among the case types in which a statute authorizes the appointment of a guardian ad litem.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(3)(D) — 2 cases
In re Child of Philip S., 2020 ME 2 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). They contend that the court erred in concluding, based on its findings of fact, that they lacked standing.”
Mark R. Martin v. Marylou E. MacMahan, 2021 ME 62 (Me. 2021). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2) (2021); see also, e.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(3)(E) — 6 cases
Todd A. Kilborn v. Nicole Carey, 2016 ME 78 (Me. 2016). “” 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(3)(E) (2015); see Pitts, 2014 ME 59, ¶¶ 42-58 , 90 A.”
Michelle A. Gardner v. Leslie Greenlaw, 2022 ME 53 (Me. 2022). “on that the best interests determinations required in the guardianship actions and in the actions for de facto parentage are distinct determinations, we vacate the court’s judgment and remand the matter for the court to consider the grandmother’s standing with respect to her…”
In re Child of Philip S., 2020 ME 2 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2018). They contend that the court erred in concluding, based on its findings of fact, that they lacked standing.”
Mark R. Martin v. Marylou E. MacMahan, 2021 ME 62 (Me. 2021). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891(2) (2021); see also, e.”
Kateryna A. Bagrii v. John P. Campbell, 2025 ME 38 (Me. 2025). “1 Although no party raises the issue, de facto parentage cases, see 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2025), are not among the case types in which a statute authorizes the appointment of a guardian ad litem.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 19-A, § 1891(4)(B) — 3 cases
Michelle A. Gardner v. Leslie Greenlaw, 2022 ME 53 (Me. 2022). “on that the best interests determinations required in the guardianship actions and in the actions for de facto parentage are distinct determinations, we vacate the court’s judgment and remand the matter for the court to consider the grandmother’s standing with respect to her…”
Timothy R. Libby v. Kyle Estabrook, 2020 ME 71 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2020). With his petition, Libby included an affidavit alleging facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child.”
Timothy R. Libby v. Kyle Estabrook, 2020 ME 71 (Me. 2020). “See 19-A M.R.S. § 1891 (2020). With his petition, Libby included an affidavit alleging facts to support the existence of a de facto parent relationship with the child.”
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.