## Facts

- A biological mother, recently divorced with limited financial resources, became pregnant in 1983 and decided to place the child for adoption.
- She entered a written agreement (Sept. 15, 1983) with prospective adoptive parents to surrender the unborn child for adoption.
- Throughout the pregnancy, she received legal advice and counseling and discussed alternatives to adoption with a social services professional.
- The child was born on March 5, 1984.
- On March 7, 1984, the mother surrendered the newborn to the prospective adoptive parents and executed a judicial consent to adoption before a magistrate.
- During the consent proceeding, she testified under oath that she had considered adoption throughout the pregnancy and was not threatened or coerced.
- The child remained continuously in the prospective adoptive parents’ custody from March 7, 1984.
- On March 20, 1984, the mother filed a written revocation of consent and sought to terminate the adoption proceedings.
- After an evidentiary hearing, the magistrate denied revocation, finding no fraud or duress and concluding the mother was estopped under governing Idaho precedent; the district court affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether a birth mother may revoke a judicially executed consent to adoption, absent fraud or duress, after the child has been placed with prospective adoptive parents who have continuously had custody.

## Decision

- The Idaho Supreme Court affirmed.
- The court held the mother’s consent was knowing, voluntary, and valid.
- The court found no fraud, duress, or coercion that would justify setting aside the consent.
- Applying equitable principles and Idaho precedent, the court concluded the mother was estopped from revoking her consent after the child’s placement and continuous custody with the prospective adoptive parents.

## Legal Principles

- A valid consent to adoption is not revocable at will; withdrawal requires legally sufficient grounds such as fraud, duress, or other equitable circumstances.
- Judicial supervision of consent, including sworn inquiry into voluntariness and understanding, strongly supports the validity and finality of the consent.
- Equity considers the adoptive parents’ reliance after placement and the child’s need for stability when determining whether revocation should be allowed.
- A change of heart, standing alone, does not justify revocation of a valid adoption consent after placement.

## Conclusion

The court refused to permit revocation of a judicially confirmed, voluntary adoption consent where no fraud or duress was shown and the child had lived continuously with the prospective adoptive parents, holding the mother was estopped from withdrawing consent under equitable principles and controlling Idaho precedent.


Petition of Steve B.D., 723 P.2d 829 (Idaho 1986)