## Facts

- The child, S.D.W., was born in October 2010; the mother relinquished the child to an adoption agency in Mecklenburg County.
- The mother omitted the biological father’s name from the birth certificate and provided an incorrect name for him in adoption-related paperwork.
- The agency searched for the incorrectly identified father and did not locate the biological father.
- The biological father remained at the same residence and employment with unchanged contact information and did not know of the pregnancy or birth.
- In April 2011, after hearing a rumor, the father contacted the mother and learned for the first time that the child had been born.
- After learning of the child, the father took steps to assert parental rights and sought to participate in the adoption proceeding and obtain custody.
- The trial court denied the father’s motion to intervene and motions to dismiss, granted summary judgment for the adoptive parents on whether the father’s consent was required, and allowed the adoption to proceed without his consent under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 48-3-601.
- The court of appeals reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on whether § 48-3-601 was unconstitutional as applied to the father.
- The Supreme Court of North Carolina granted review.

## Issues

1. Whether the biological father’s consent to adoption was required under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 48-3-601.
2. Whether applying § 48-3-601 to permit adoption without the father’s consent violated his federal or state due process rights when he lacked knowledge of the child’s existence until months after birth.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of North Carolina reversed the court of appeals and reinstated the trial court’s orders.
- The Court held the father’s consent was not required under § 48-3-601.
- The Court rejected an as-applied due process challenge and held the statute could be applied to deny the father the right to withhold consent.
- The Court reasoned that the father did not satisfy the statute’s requirements for timely steps associated with recognition of paternity, support, and assumption of parental responsibility, placing him outside the statutorily defined class of fathers whose interests receive constitutional protection in this context.

## Legal Principles

- A biological connection alone does not entitle an unwed father to block an adoption; constitutional protection depends on timely affirmative efforts to assume parental responsibility.
- A state may condition an unwed father’s ability to withhold consent to adoption on compliance with reasonable statutory requirements designed to identify and protect “responsible” fathers.
- Under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 48-3-601, a father who does not meet specified criteria within statutory time limits may be treated as not requiring consent for adoption.
- Due process is not violated when the statute is applied according to its generally applicable criteria to advance state interests in prompt, stable, and certain adoptive placements.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Court of North Carolina held that § 48-3-601 permitted the adoption to proceed without the biological father’s consent and that applying the statute to him did not violate due process because he did not meet the statute’s timely requirements associated with legally recognized, responsible parenthood.


In re Adoption of S.D.W., 758 S.E.2d 374 (N.C. 2014)