2015 ORS 109.096¹
Notice to putative father when paternity not established

(1) When the paternity of a child has not been established under ORS 109.070 (Establishing paternity), the putative father is entitled to reasonable notice in adoption or other court proceedings concerning the custody of the child, except for juvenile court proceedings, if the petitioner knows, or by the exercise of ordinary diligence should have known:

(a) That the child resided with the putative father at any time during the 60 days immediately preceding the initiation of the proceeding, or at any time since the childs birth if the child is less than 60 days old when the proceeding is initiated; or

(b) That the putative father repeatedly has contributed or tried to contribute to the support of the child during the year immediately preceding the initiation of the proceeding, or during the period since the childs birth if the child is less than one year old when the proceeding is initiated.

(2) Except as provided in subsection (3) or (4) of this section, a verified statement of the mother of the child or of the petitioner, or an affidavit of another person with knowledge of the facts, filed in the proceeding and asserting that the child has not resided with the putative father, as provided in subsection (1)(a) of this section, and that the putative father has not contributed or tried to contribute to the support of the child, as provided in subsection (1)(b) of this section, is sufficient proof to enable the court to grant the relief sought without notice to the putative father.

(3) The putative father is entitled to reasonable notice in a proceeding for the adoption of the child if notice of the initiation of filiation proceedings as required by ORS 109.225 (Notice to Center for Health Statistics after petition filed) was on file with the Center for Health Statistics of the Oregon Health Authority prior to the childs being placed in the physical custody of a person or persons for the purpose of adoption by them. If the notice of the initiation of filiation proceedings was not on file at the time of the placement, the putative father is barred from contesting the adoption proceeding.

(4) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3) of this section, the putative father is entitled to reasonable notice in court proceedings concerning the custody of the child, other than juvenile court proceedings, if notice of the initiation of filiation proceedings as required by ORS 109.225 (Notice to Center for Health Statistics after petition filed) was on file with the Center for Health Statistics prior to the initiation of the proceedings.

(5) Notice under this section is not required to be given to a putative father who was a party to filiation proceedings under ORS 109.125 (Who may initiate proceedings) that were dismissed or resulted in a finding that he was not the father of the child.

(6) The notice required under this section shall be given in the manner provided in ORS 109.330 (Notice to nonconsenting parent).

(7) No notice given under this section need disclose the name of the mother of the child.

(8) A putative father has the primary responsibility to protect his rights, and nothing in this section shall be used to set aside an act of a permanent nature including, but not limited to, adoption or termination of parental rights, unless the father establishes within one year after the entry of the final judgment or order fraud on the part of a petitioner in the proceeding with respect to matters specified in subsections (1) to (5) of this section. [1975 c.640 §7; 1979 c.491 §1; 1983 c.709 §39; 1995 c.90 §1; 2003 c.576 §137; 2005 c.160 §5; 2009 c.595 §68]

Notes of Decisions

If a putative father has not come forward to initiate parent-child rela­tionship, his liberty interest is insufficient to justify pro­ce­dures necessary to apprise him of adop­tion pro­ceed­ing under this sec­tion, and mo­tion to dispense with notice of adop­tion did not violate federal due process rights of putative father. P and P v. CSD, 66 Or App 66, 673 P2d 864 (1983)

Putative father who filed filia­tion pro­ceed­ing in an­oth­er state but did not file notice with Oregon Vital Statistics Unit was not entitled to notice of adop­tion pro­ceed­ing. Burns v. Crenshaw, 84 Or App 257, 733 P2d 922 (1987), Sup Ct review denied

Putative father otherwise qualifying for notice is not barred from objecting due to failure to qualify under notice to Vital Statistics Unit pro­vi­sion. Vanlue v. Collins, 98 Or App 140, 779 P2d 163 (1989), Sup Ct review denied, as modified by 99 Or App 469, 782 P2d 951 (1989); Hiskey v. Hamilton, 111 Or App 39, 824 P2d 1170 (1992), Sup Ct review denied

To set aside adop­tion based on mothers fraud in adop­tion pro­ceed­ing, father must obtain final judg­ment from trial court re­gard­ing mothers fraud within one year after adop­tion has become final. Hallford v. Smith, 120 Or App 57, 852 P2d 249 (1993), Sup Ct review denied

Provision for putative father to es­tab­lish fraud by peti­tioner within one year after entry of final decree or order sets time limit for es­tab­lishing fraud, but does not require that adop­tion be finalized before fraud is es­tab­lished. Gruett v. Nesbitt, 172 Or App 113, 17 P3d 1090 (2001), on reconsidera­tion173 Or App 225, 21 P3d 168 (2001)

Chapter 109

Law Review Cita­tions

12 WLJ 569-589 (1976)


1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 109—Parent and Child Rights and Relationships, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors109.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 109, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano109.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.