Peter Kruithoff v. Catholic Charities of West Michigan, et al.

Under Michigan’s Safe Delivery of Newborns Law (“SDNL”), a parent-child relationship can be permanently severed (1) with less notice than is required in a child abuse case, (2) without any system in place for courts to determine if another court already has jurisdiction over the child, (3) without an adjudication of parental fitness, and (4) with only a preponderance of the evidence that termination is in the best interests of the child. Does the SDNL comply with Due Process requirements and, if not, does Michigan have a sufficient State interest to justify same?

Legal parents are entitled to an individualized fitness determination before the State destroys their family life. The SDNL permits the permanent severing of a parent’s relationship with their child based not on their actions, but on the other parent’s decision to surrender the child pursuant to Michigan’s SDNL rather than to surrender the child pursuant to Michigan’s Adoption Code. Does the SDNL violate the one-parent doctrine articulated by this Court in Stanley v Illinois?

The Equal Protection Clause prohibits the disparate treatment of individuals based upon marital status absent the classification furthering an important government interest by means that are substantially related to that interest. In Michigan, unwed fathers have a greater ability to secure their rights to a surrendered newborn than a married father. Does Michigan have a sufficient State interest to justify legislation that provides lesser procedural protections to married parents than those who are unwed?