## Facts

- A.C. and M.K., an unmarried same-sex couple, served as licensed caregivers for siblings M.A. and R.A., both of whom had moderate-to-severe special needs.
- The children were in the custody of the Department of Health and Human Services after their biological parents’ rights were terminated in a child-protection proceeding.
- A.C. and M.K. applied to the department to adopt both children.
- After investigation, the department’s adoption supervisor, the children’s guardian ad litem, and the home-study report each recommended that A.C. and M.K. be allowed to adopt.
- The department consented to the adoptions.
- A.C. and M.K. filed two joint adoption petitions in the probate court, one petition for each child.
- The probate court denied both petitions on the ground that it lacked jurisdiction because the petitioners sought to adopt jointly but were not married.
- A.C. and M.K. appealed the denial to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court (Law Court).

## Issues

1. Whether Maine’s adoption statutes permit (and thus give the probate court jurisdiction to consider) a joint adoption petition filed by two unmarried adults, where the department has consented and the required evaluations recommend approval.

## Decision

- The Law Court held that the probate court had jurisdiction to consider the petitions and that the probate court erred by treating the petitioners’ unmarried status as a categorical bar to joint adoption.
- The court concluded that nothing in Maine’s adoption statutes clearly prohibits two unmarried adults from petitioning together to adopt, and the statutes should not be read to create a marriage-only jurisdictional requirement absent express legislative language.
- The court reversed the probate court’s denial and remanded for further proceedings consistent with the opinion, including the required determinations under Maine adoption law (such as the children’s welfare/best-interests findings), rather than dismissal on jurisdictional grounds.

## Legal Principles

- Adoption statutes are interpreted according to their text and purpose, with attention to the Legislature’s design for placing children in stable, suitable homes.
- A court should not convert a statutory condition (such as who may petition) into a jurisdictional limitation unless the Legislature clearly makes it one.
- Where the statutory scheme does not expressly forbid joint petitions by unmarried adults, courts should not infer a blanket prohibition that forecloses individualized assessment of the proposed adoptive placement.
- Even when a petition is procedurally permissible, the adoption still requires statutory findings and the child-centered determinations required by Maine law; the question of who may petition is separate from whether the adoption should be granted on the merits.

## Conclusion

In *Adoption of M.A.*, 930 A.2d 1088 (Me. 2007), the Maine Supreme Judicial Court reversed a probate court’s refusal to entertain joint adoption petitions filed by an unmarried same-sex couple who had departmental consent and favorable evaluations, holding that the probate court had jurisdiction to consider the petitions and must proceed to the required statutory merits determinations rather than deny solely because the petitioners were not married.


Adoption of M.A., 930 A.2d 1088 (2007)