Since becoming an integral part of Indiana adoption law on July 1, 1994, the Putative Father Registry has worked remarkably well. This issue of Adoption Briefs will provide a brief overview of the Registry, the justification for the Registry, and a review of some of the Registry's successes during its first year in operation.

The Indiana General Assembly, in a bipartisan effort, designed the Registry to prevent a "Baby Jessica" tragedy from happening in Indiana.

Very briefly, in the Baby Jessica case, the mother of the child intentionally identified the wrong man as the father. The adoptive parents believing that they had the consent of the father assumed custody of the child only to learn that the real father objected to the adoption.

T so that he may object to the adoption if he wishes to establish a relationship with his child. Conversely, the Registry protects adoptive parents and birth mothers from having adoptions disrupted. A "putative father" is a man who is not married to the mother or a man who is has not legally established his paternity of the child.

As of the spring of 1995, in Indiana, a man could establish in two ways: court action and paternity affidavit. In other words, if a man is not married to the woman or has not formally established paternity, for him to receive notice of an adoption, he must register with the State Board of Health any time during the pregnancy and up to thirty days following the birth of the child. The statute provides a longer period of time to register when a petition for adoption is not filed within thirty days of the birth. If he registers in a timely manner, he will receive notice of the adoption and an opportunity to contest the adoption.

In fact, after receiving notice of the adoption, if he establishes paternity, he will acquire an absolute veto over the adoption.

On the other hand, if he does not register within thirty days of the birth of the child (or prior to the filing of a petition for adoption if the petition is filed more than thirty days after birth), his consent to the adoption is irrevocably implied.

With the enactment of the Registry, adoptive parents know that once the thirty-day time period has expired, they can rest assured that no man will come forward claiming to be the father of the child. The lives of children being adopted will not be disrupted.

Further justification for the Registry includes the following:

1. It gives the birth father an opportunity to protect his parental rights without having to rely upon either the adoptive parents or the birth mother for his information.

2. It assures the birth mother and the adoptive parents that the adoption will not be disrupted because an unknown father or a father whose whereabouts are not known later appears on the scene.

3. It creates a more appropriate assumption of responsibility by the putative father. If a man wants to have a relationship with his child, it only makes sense that he should take responsibility for protecting his own rights rather than relying upon the birth mother or the adoptive parents to protect his rights for him.

4. It more effectively protects the rights of the putative father who wants to have a relationship with his child than any other legislative scheme: (a) publishing notice is ineffective, (b) mandating that the adoptive parents somehow find the putative father is unreasonable because, in most cases, they have never had a relationship with him, (c) imposing penalties upon a birth mother for refusing to identify the putative father punishes the wrong parties because the lives of the adoptive parents and the child are disrupted if the birth mother lies, and (d) requiring the mother to identify the putative father is unworkable in those cases in which the birth mother honestly does not know the identity or whereabouts of the putative father.

5. It allows the birth mother to protect her privacy by not having her name published in a newspaper.

6. It relieves a birth mother from perjuring herself if she is unwilling to identify the putative father.

When the Indiana legislature passed this legislation, it also provided for publication of the existence of the Registry, including having notice of the existence of the Registry printed on the renewal envelopes for license plates in 1994, posters being displayed in every hospital, Bureau of Motor Vehicles, and every courthouse in Indiana, and a newspaper publications announcing the Registry published in each of the 92 counties in Indiana, four times a year for the first three years.

As a result of the efforts of the State Board of Health and other media attention which the Registry has garnered, approximately 422 men registered between July 1, 1994, and October 31, 1995. During the first year in operation, the Registry generated gross revenues of approximately $92,000 and incurred expenses of approximately $3,000, for a net profit to the State Board of Health of approximately $89,000. (The profit would have been approximately $60,000 higher had some initial implementation problems been avoided).

Funding for the Registry comes from a $50.00 filing fee which is paid any time an adoption is filed in the State of Indiana. In a typical year, approximately 3000 adoptions are filed in Indiana creating indefinite annual revenues to the State Board of Health of $150,000.

While the Registry may not be perfect, it certainly is more equitable to all parties than other legislative schemes.

In short, Indiana's Putative Father Registry is fulfilling the purposes for which it was enacted, while at the same time, creating surplus revenues for the Indiana State Board of Health

Credits: Steven M. Kirsh