## Facts

- A natural mother gave birth to twins in Kansas, then moved with them to Missouri and established Missouri residency.
- Prospective adoptive parents (her former foster parents) discussed adoption with her and discussed that the ICPC would apply if she remained a Missouri resident; they also discussed a plan for her to establish Kansas residency to avoid ICPC requirements.
- Before the mother moved, she asked the prospective adoptive parents to take the twins to Kansas to “give her a break,” and they transported the twins from Missouri to Kansas.
- Shortly after the transfer, the mother traveled to Kansas and executed a written consent to adoption that was conditional on consents from two possible fathers.
- The mother later leased a Kansas trailer from one prospective adoptive parent, enrolled her older children in Kansas schools, and applied for Kansas public assistance.
- After the fathers’ consents were obtained, the mother notified the prospective adoptive parents she no longer wished to proceed and attempted to revoke her consent.
- The prospective adoptive parents filed an adoption petition in Kansas; the mother sought declaratory relief, tendered a written revocation, and moved to dismiss based on ICPC noncompliance.
- The district court found the mother was a Missouri resident at the time of the interstate transfer and consent, held the ICPC applied and was not satisfied, allowed revocation, and dismissed the adoption petition.

## Issues

1. Whether transporting the twins from Missouri to Kansas in connection with contemplated adoption constituted an interstate “placement” triggering the ICPC, and what time period controlled that determination.
2. Whether failure to comply with the ICPC provided sufficient grounds to permit revocation of the natural mother’s consent and dismissal of the adoption petition.

## Decision

- The Kansas Court of Appeals affirmed.
- The court held the ICPC applied because the twins were moved across state lines “as a preliminary to a possible adoption” while the mother remained a Missouri resident.
- The court rejected using later events (including efforts to establish Kansas residency and satisfaction of consent conditions) as the operative date for ICPC applicability, focusing instead on the time of the interstate transfer and consent.
- The court held that, on these facts, ICPC noncompliance was sufficient to allow the mother to revoke consent and to require dismissal of the adoption proceeding.

## Legal Principles

- The ICPC’s purpose is to protect children involved in covered interstate placements.
- An interstate placement “as a preliminary to a possible adoption,” including an informal private transfer, triggers ICPC procedures and approvals before the child is brought into the receiving state for that purpose.
- ICPC applicability turns on the actual interstate movement and the relevant residency status at the time of the placement, not on later efforts to recharacterize residency or timing.
- Under case-specific circumstances, failure to comply with the ICPC may constitute sufficient grounds to permit revocation of a natural parent’s consent and dismissal of an adoption petition.

## Conclusion

The court upheld dismissal of the adoption petition because the twins’ transfer from Missouri to Kansas was an interstate preadoptive placement subject to the ICPC, and noncompliance with the ICPC justified allowing the mother to revoke her consent and terminating the adoption proceeding.


In re Adoption of A.M.M., 949 P.2d 1155 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997)