An act relating to termination of parental rights in an adoption proceeding
S.13 would amend Vermont’s adoption law governing termination of parental rights in an adoption proceeding. Specifically, it reinstates a factor that a court may consider when deciding whether a parent has failed to exercise parental responsibility for at least six months: whether the parent made reasonable and consistent child-support payments in line with their financial means, if legally obligated to do so. The bill keeps the existing framework that requires clear and convincing evidence and a separate finding that termination is in the child’s best interests.
Under current law, the court may consider a parent’s failure to communicate or visit with the child and failure to show an ability and willingness to assume custody. S.13 would add support payments back into that list of relevant factors, making financial support explicitly relevant again in adoption-related termination cases involving a minor over six months old. The bill takes effect upon passage.
The bill would amend 15A V.S.A. § 3-504, which sets the grounds for terminating the parent-child relationship in adoption proceedings. Its practical effect is to broaden the evidence a court may weigh when determining whether a respondent has not exercised parental responsibility, by expressly allowing consideration of a parent’s support-payment history relative to their financial means. It does not create an automatic ground for termination, but it could influence outcomes in contested adoption cases involving parental rights.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented debate or roll-call history to assess. Based on the bill text, the measure appears narrowly targeted and procedural, suggesting a policy intent to restore a previously available consideration rather than to overhaul adoption law. The stated purpose indicates a child-welfare rationale focused on the best interests of the minor.
The likely point of contention is whether a parent’s failure to make support payments should be treated as a meaningful indicator of parental responsibility in termination proceedings, especially where the parent may have limited financial means. Supporters would likely view the change as restoring a relevant best-interests factor and encouraging parental accountability, while opponents may argue that nonpayment can reflect poverty rather than abandonment and should not weigh too heavily in a proceeding that can permanently sever parental rights. The bill’s emphasis on payments “in accordance with the respondent’s financial means” appears designed to address that concern.