Here, the circuit court’s order states that, "after examining the Arkansas Department of Human Services' written reasons for withholding consent, the Court finds that the Arkansas Department of Human Services is unreasonably withholding consent." DHS's written reasons were provided to the Bartons via a letter dated May 15, 2017, which stated that DHS did not feel it was in P.S.'s best interest to be adopted by the Bartons and that DHS preferred that she be adopted by the Bankses, who are biological relatives. There is no dispute that DHS's preference for the Bankses, as biological family members, standing alone, would constitute an unreasonable basis for withholding consent to the Bartons' adoption petition.[1] The Bankses do not argue otherwise.
- ↑ It is well established under Arkansas law that grandparents' rights are derivative of their child's parental rights. Burt v. Ark. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 99 Ark. App. 402, 405, 261 S.W.3d 468, 471 (2007). "Because a grandparent’s rights are only derivative, they may be contingent upon the establishment of paternity or maternity and are subject to divestment when parental rights are terminated." Suster v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 314 Ark. 92, 96, 858 S.W.2d 122, 124 (1993) (quoting Chauncey Brummer & Era Looney, Grandparent Rights in Custody, Adoption, and Visitation Cases, 39 Ark. L. Rev. 259, 261 (1985)). In Suster, for example, the supreme court affirmed the denial of a maternal grandmother's motion to intervene in a dependency-neglect case after her daughter's parental rights to the child had been terminated, stating that "Mrs. Suster’s rights as a grandparent were derivative of her daughter's parental rights and as a result were terminated when her daughter's parental rights were terminated." Suster, 314 Ark. at 97, 858 S.W.2d at 125. Therefore, while the juvenile code contains a preference for relative placement in dependency-neglect proceedings, Ellis v. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs., 2016 Ark. 441, at 8, 505 S.W.3d 678, 683 (citing Arkansas Code Annotated section 9-27-355(b)(1)), our supreme court has made clear that a biological grandparent's status as a "relative" terminates when his or her child’s parental rights are terminated. With respect to termination of parental rights, the Arkansas Supreme Court has stated:
These statutes point to a public policy which, in determining what is in the child's best interest, favors a complete severing of the ties between a child and its biological family when he is placed for adoption. We have said it is "unquestionably within the province of the legislature to decide that the reasons favoring the solidarity of the adoptive family outweigh those favoring grandparents and other blood kin who are related to the child through the deceased parent." Wilson v. Wallace, 274 Ark. 48, 50, 622 S.W.2d 164, 166 (1981). Our legislature has declined to adopt another rule, so we will not here.
Suster, 314 Ark. at 97, 858 S.W.2d at 125.
22
