## Facts

- Tammy J. Thorndike and Jessica Ann Lisio were in a long-term same-sex relationship and began living together in 2007.
- Lisio’s son, Caden, lived with them; Thorndike provided extensive daily caregiving while Lisio worked.
- In 2009, Lisio had a second child, Arianna, conceived by artificial insemination; that year, the couple registered as domestic partners.
- After Arianna’s birth, Thorndike stayed home and assumed primary caregiving responsibilities for both children, including transportation, bathing, reading, play, and medical care.
- Thorndike held himself out publicly as a parent, and the children treated him as a parent.
- The relationship ended in 2012, and Thorndike moved out but continued regular contact with the children, including daily bedtime calls and visits.
- After Lisio began a relationship with a new partner, Caden reported to Thorndike that the partner was hitting him; Thorndike reported the allegation to the Department of Health and Human Services.
- Following the report, Lisio cooperated with the agency but cut off Thorndike’s contact with the children.
- In 2014, Thorndike filed an action seeking parental rights and responsibilities and amended to allege de facto parenthood.
- The District Court found, by clear and convincing evidence, that Thorndike was a de facto parent of both children and entered an order granting Lisio primary residence and Thorndike increasing contact, with shared parental rights and responsibilities.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence supported, by clear and convincing proof, a finding that Thorndike was a de facto parent of Caden and Arianna.
2. Whether the court could award parental rights and responsibilities to a de facto parent over the biological parent’s objection absent “exceptional circumstances” justifying interference with the biological parent’s constitutional rights.

## Decision

- The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the District Court’s judgment.
- The Court held that the record supported the finding that Thorndike undertook a permanent, unequivocal, committed, and responsible parental role in each child’s life.
- The Court held that the District Court did not err in finding exceptional circumstances sufficient to permit an order affecting Lisio’s parental rights.
- The parental rights and responsibilities order remained in effect: primary residence with Lisio and a gradually increasing schedule of contact for Thorndike, with shared decision-making authority.

## Legal Principles

- De facto parenthood requires proof, by clear and convincing evidence, that the claimant undertook a permanent, unequivocal, committed, and responsible parental role in the child’s life.
- A court may not interfere with a legal parent’s fundamental parental rights absent a finding of exceptional circumstances sufficient to justify that interference.
- De facto parent determinations are highly fact-dependent; appellate review defers to supported trial-court findings and does not reweigh credibility or disputed evidence.
- When a child has a substantial parent-child relationship with a nonlegal parent, a sudden termination of that relationship may support a finding of exceptional circumstances, permitting an order serving the child’s welfare.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed recognition of Thorndike as a de facto parent and upheld shared parental rights because the evidence showed long-term, primary caregiving and an established parent-child relationship, and because exceptional circumstances justified an order affecting the biological parent’s rights.


Thorndike v. Lisio, 154 A.3d 624 (Me. 2017)