adoption cases-stephanie astorga garcia and landingin

7/25/2019 Adoption Cases-stephanie Astorga Garcia and Landingin

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/adoption-cases-stephanie-astorga-garcia-and-landingin 1/4

G.R. No. 148311. March 31, 2005

IN THE MATTER OF THE ADOPTION OF STEPHANIE

NATHY ASTORGA GARCIA

HONORATO . CATINDIG, petitioner .

SANDO!A"#G$TIERRE%, J.:

FACTS&

Ho'ora(o . Ca()'*)+, herein petitioner, fled a petition to

adopt his minor illegitimate child S(-ha') Na(h A/(or+a

Garc)a. He alleged therein, among others, that Stephanie was

born on June 26, 1994 that her mother is Ga A/(or+a

Garc)a that Stephanie has been using her mother!s middle

name and surname and that he is now a widower and

"ualifed to be her adopting parent. He pra#ed that

Stephanie!s middle name $storga be changed to %Garc)a,%

her mother!s surname, and that her surname %Garc)a% be

changed to %Ca()'*)+,% his surname.

&he trial court granted the petition, in the absence o' an#

opposition to the same. (t also 'ound out that the petitioner is

"ualifed to maintain, care 'or and educate the child to beadopted and that the grant o' the petition would redound to

the best interest and wel'are o' the minor. )ursuant to $rticle

1*9 o' the +amil# ode o' the )hilippines, the minor,

according to the ourt, shall be -nown as S&)H$/( /$&H0

$&(/(.

&he petitioner then fled a motion 'or clarifcation and3or

reconsideration pra#ing that Stephanie be allowed to use the

surname o' her natural mother $5($ as her middle name,

howe7er, the trial court denied the same holding that there is

no law or 8urisprudence allowing an adopted child to use the

surname o' his biological mother as his middle name.

ISS$E&

hether or not an illegitimate child ma# use the surname o'

her mother as her middle name when she is subse"uentl#

adopted b# her natural 'ather

R$"ING&

&he Supreme ourt 'ound merit in the petition.

(t stated that the use o' surname is f;ed b# law, as pro7ided

'or under the +amil# ode, howe7er, the law is silent as to

what middle name a child ma# use.

No(a, (h a )/ ))/ /)'( a/ (o ha( )**

'a a' a*o-( a /. $rticle <6= o' the i7il ode

merel# pro7ides that %an adopted child shall bear the

surname of the adopter .% $lso, $rticle 1*9 o' the +amil# ode,

enumerating the legal e>ects o' adoption, is li-ewise silent on

the matter, thus:

%1 +or ci7il purposes, the a*o-(* shall be ** to be

a +)()a( ch)* o6 (h a*o-(r/ and both shall ac"uire

the reciprocal rights and obligations arising 'rom the

relationship o' parent and child, including the r)+h( o6 (h

a*o-(* (o / (h /r'a o6 (h a*o-(r/

; ; ;%

$s correctl# pointed out b# the ?@ce o' the Solicitor eneral,

the members o' the i7il ode and +amil# Aaw ommittees

that dra'ted the +amil# ode rco+')7* (h F))-)'o

c/(o o6 a**)'+ (h /r'a o6 (h ch)*/ o(hr a/

h)/ )** 'a. (n the Binutes o' the Joint Beeting o' the

i7il ode and +amil# Aaw ommittees, the members

appro7ed the suggestion that (h )')()a or /r'a o6 (h

o(hr /ho* )*)a( -rc* (h /r'a o6

(h 6a(hr.

(n said minutes, Justice aguioa stated that )( /ho*

a'*a(or 6or (h ch)* (o / (h /r'a o6 (h

6a(hr a'* -r)//)9 )' (h ca/ o6 (h /r'a o6

(h o(hr. He li-ewise suggested (ha( )( /ha

a'*a(or o' (h ch)* (o / (h /r'a o6 (h

6a(hr ( h a / (h /r'a o6 (h o(hr

a o6 a' )')()a or a )** 'a.

(n the case o' an adopted child, the law pro7ides that % the

adopted shall bear the surname of the adopters.% $gain, it is

silent whether he can use a middle name. hat it onl#

e;pressl# allows, as a matter o' right and obligation, is 'or the

adoptee to bear the surname o' the adopter, upon issuance o'

the decree o' adoption.

&he ourt added that $doption is defned as the process o'

ma-ing a child, whether related or not to the adopter, possess

in general, the rights accorded to a legitimate child. (t is a

juridical act, a proceeding in rem which creates between two

persons a relationship similar to that which results from

legitimate paternity and liation. The modern trend is to

consider adoption not merely as an act to establish arelationship of paternity and liation, but also as an act which

endows the child with a legitimate status. &he same is

confrmed in 19*9, when the Ph))--)'/, as a S(a( Par(

(o (h Co'9'()o' o6 (h R)+h(/ o6 (h Ch)* )')()a(*

(h $')(* Na()o'/, acc-(* (h -r)'c)- (ha(

a*o-()o' )/ )-r//* )(h /oc)a a'* ora

r/-o'/)))(, a'* (ha( )(/ '*r)'+ )'('( )/ +ar*

(o 6a9or (h a*o-(* ch)*. 5epublic $ct /o. *==2,

otherwise -nown as the %Domestic Adoption Act of

199,% secures these rights and pri7ileges 'or the adopted.



?ne o' the e>ects o' adoption is that the adopted is deemed

to be a legitimate child o' the adopter 'or all intents and

purposes pursuant to $rticle 1*9 o' the +amil# ode and

Section 1C $rticle D o' 5$ *==2.

)'+ a +)()a( ch)* 9)r( o6 hr a*o-()o', )(

6oo/ (ha( S(-ha') )/ '()(* (o a (h r)+h(/

-ro9)** a (o a +)()a( ch)* )(ho(

*)/cr))'a()o' o6 a' )'*, )'c*)'+ (h r)+h( (o ar

(h /r'a o6 hr 6a(hr a'* hr o(hr, a/ *)/c//*

ao9.

$dditionall#, as aptl# stated b# both parties, Stephanie!s

continued use o' her mother!s surname arcia as her middle

name will maintain her maternal lineage. $rticle 1*9< o' the

+amil# ode and Section 1*, $rticle D o' 5$ *==2 law on

adoption pro7ide that the adoptee remains an intestate heir

o' his3her biological parent. Hence, Stephanie can well assertor claim her hereditar# rights 'rom her natural mother in the

'uture.

Aastl#, the ourt held that adoption statutes should be

liberall# construed to carr# out the benefcent purposes o'

adoption. &he interests and wel'are o' the adopted child are o'

primar# and paramount consideration, hence, e7er#

reasonable intendment should be sustained to promote the

noble and compassionate ob8ecti7es o' the law.

$rt. 1E o' the /ew i7il ode pro7ides that:

%(n case o' doubt in the interpretation or application o' laws, it

is presumed that the lawma-ing bod# intended right and

8ustice to pre7ail.%

&his pro7ision, according to the ode ommission, %is

necessar# so that it ma# tip the scales in 'a7or o' right and 8ustice when the law is doubt'ul or obscure. (t will strengthen

the determination o' the courts to a7oid an in8ustice which

ma# apparentl# be authoriFed b# some wa# o' interpreting

the law.%

Hence, since there is no law prohibiting an )+)()a(

ch)* adopted b# her natural 'ather, li-e Stephanie, to use, as

middle name her mother!s surname, the ourt 'ound no

reason wh# she should not be allowed to do so. :HEREFORE,

the petition was 5$/&.

G.R. No. 1;4<48 =' 2>, 200;

DI:ATA RAMOS "ANDINGIN )etitioner,

7s.

REP$"IC OF THE PHI"IPPINES, 5espondent.



CA""E=O, SR., J.:

FACTS&

iwata 5amos Aandingin, a citiFen o' the Gnited States o'

$merica GS$, o' +ilipino parentage and a resident o' uam,

GS$, fled a petition 'or the adoption o' minors laine iFon

5amos, lma iFon 5amos, and ugene iFon 5amos, all o'

whom are the natural children o' Banuel 5amos, petitioner!s

brother, and $melia 5amos.

Aandingin, as petitioner, alleged in her petition that when

Banuel died, the children were le't to their paternal

grandmother, Baria &aruc 5amos. &heir biological mother,

$melia, went to (tal#, remarried there, and now has two

children b# her second marriage. She no longer

communicated with her children b# Banuel 5amos nor with

her inlaws 'rom the time did she le't up to the institution o'

the adoption.

&he minors are being fnanciall# supported b# the petitioner,

her children, and relati7es abroad. $s Baria, the grandmother

passed awa#, petitioner wanted to adopt the children.

)etitioner a7ers that the minors ha7e gi7en their written

consent to the adoption and that she is "ualifed to adopt as

shown b# the 'act that she is a =C#earold widow, has

children o' her own who are alread# married, gain'ull#emplo#ed and ha7e their respecti7e 'amilies. Her children

li-ewise ga7e their written consent to the adoption o' the

minors.

)etitioner!s brother, Bariano 5amos, who earns substantial

income, li-ewise signifed his willingness and commitment to

support the minors while in petitioner!s custod#.

&he court ordered the epartment o' Social el'are ande7elopment S to conduct a case stud# and to submit a

report thereon.

liFabeth )agbilao, the Social el'are ?@cer o' the S in

&arlac, submitted a hild Stud# 5eport with a recommendation

that the minors are eligible 'or adoption. (n the report, the

mother o' the children allegedl# 7oluntaril# consented to the

said adoption in 7iew o' her inabilit# to pro7ide the parental

care, guidance and support the# need. $n $@da7it o' onsent

was li-ewise e;ecuted b# the mother which was attached in

the report.

$ 8oint a@da7it was also attached wherein the three minors

e;pressed their willingness to be adopted and be 8oined with

the petitioner in the GS$.

uring trial, petitioner 'ailed to present )agbilao the social

wor-er as witness and o>er in e7idence the 7oluntar#

consent o' $melia 5amos to the adoption. )etitioner, li-ewise,

'ailed to present an# documentar# e7idence to pro7e that

$melia assented to the adoption.

/onetheless, the trial court granted the petition.

&he ?S appealed the decision to the ourt o' $ppeals and

the latter re7ersed the ruling o' the 5&. (t held that petitioner

'ailed to adduce in e7idence the 7oluntar# consent o' $melia

5amos, the children!s natural mother. Boreo7er, the a@da7it

o' consent o' the petitioner!s children could not also be

admitted in e7idence as the same was e;ecuted in uam, GS$

and was not authenticated or ac-nowledged be'ore a

)hilippine consular o@ce, and although petitioner has a 8ob,

she was not stable enough to support the children.

)etitioner fled a Botion 'or 5econsideration but the $ denied

the same.

ISS$E&

hether or not the petitioner is entitled to adopt the minors

R$"ING&

&he petition was denied b# the Supreme ourt 'or lac- o'

merit.

Section 9 o' the omestic $doption $ct o' 199*, pro7ides:

hose onsent is /ecessar# to the $doption. $'ter beingproperl# counseled and in'ormed o' his3her right to gi7e or

withhold his3her appro7al o' the adoption, the written consent

o' the 'ollowing to the adoption is hereb# re"uired:

a &he adoptee, i' ten 1E #ears o' age or o7er

b &he biological parents o' the child, i' -nown, or

the legal guardian, or the proper go7ernment

instrumentalit# which has legal custod# o' the child

c &he legitimate and adopted sons3daughters, ten1E #ears o' age or o7er, o' the adopters and

adoptee, i' an#

d &he illegitimate sons3daughters, ten 1E #ears o'

age or o7er, o' the adopter, i' li7ing with said adopter

and the latter!s souse, i' an#

e &he spouse, i' an#, o' the person adopting or to

be adopted.



&he general re"uirement o' consent and notice to the natural

parents is intended to protect the natural parental relationship

'rom unwarranted inter'erence b# interlopers, and to insure

the opportunit# to sa'eguard the best interests o' the child in

the manner o' the proposed adoption.

Car, (h r)((' co'/'( o6 (h )oo+)ca -ar'(/ )/

)'*)/-'/a 6or (h 9a)*)( o6 a *cr o6 a*o-()o'.I'**, (h 'a(ra r)+h( o6 a -ar'( (o h)/ ch)*

r?)r/ (ha( h)/ co'/'( /( o(a)'* 6or h)/

-ar'(a r)+h(/ a'* *()/ a (r)'a(* a'* r#

/(a)/h* )' a*o-()9 -ar'(/. I' (h)/ ca/, -()()o'r

6a)* (o /)( (h r)((' co'/'( o6 A)a Rao/

(o (h a*o-()o'.

)etitioner argued that the written consent o' the biological

mother is no longer necessar# because the latter had

e>ecti7el# abandoned the children, howe7er, the S declared

that petitioner!s contention must be re8ected. hen she fled

her petition with the trial court, 5ep. $ct /o. *==2 was alread#in e>ect. Sc()o' < (hro6 -ro9)*/ (ha( )6 (h r)(('

co'/'( o6 (h )oo+)ca -ar'(/ ca''o( o(a)'*,

(h r)((' co'/'( o6 (h +a +ar*)a' o6 (h )'or/

) /@c. I6, a/ ca)* -()()o'r, (ha( (h

)oo+)ca o(hr o6 (h )'or/ ha* )'** aa'*o'*

(h, /h /ho*, (h/ ha9 a**c* (h r)(('

co'/'( o6 (h)r +a +ar*)a'.

?rdinaril#, abandonment b# a parent to 8usti'# the adoption o'

his child without his consent is a conduct which e7inces a

settled purpose to 'orego all parental duties. &he term means

neglect and re'usal to per'orm the flial and legal obligations

o' lo7e and support. (' a parent withholds presence, lo7e, care,

the opportunit# to displa# flial a>ection, and neglects to lend

support and maintenance, the parent, in e>ect, abandons the

child. Berel# permitting the child to remain 'or a time

undisturbed in the care o' others is not such an

abandonment. &o dispense with the re"uirement o' consent,

the abandonment must be shown to ha7e e;isted at the time

o' adoption.

(n this case, petitioner relied solel# on her testimon# and that

o' laine 5amos to pro7e her claim that $melia 5amos had

abandoned her children. Howe7er, the Home Stud# 5eport o'

the S Social or-er stated that the children!s mother

sends fnancial support but 7er# minimal. (t was also shown in

the report that the eldest child consults her mother and

petitioneraunt during serious problems, as such, $melia had

not intended to abandon her children, or to permanentl# se7er

their motherchild relationship. She did not surrender or

relin"uish entirel# her motherl# obligations o' rearing the

children to her now deceased motherinlaw.

&he ourt emphasiFed that the adoption o' the minors willha7e the e>ect o' se7ering all legal ties between the

biological mother, $melia, and the adoptees, and that the

same shall then be 7ested on the adopter. I( o* (h/

a+a)'/( (h /-)r)( o6 (h a )6 'a'c)a co'/)*ra()o'

r (o (h -arao'( co'/)*ra()o' )' *c)*)'+

h(hr (o *-r)9 a -r/o' o6 -ar'(a a(hor)( o9r

h)/Bhr ch)*r'. Mor -roo6 ha/ (o a**c* (ha(

A)a ha/ o()o'a aa'*o'* (h ch)*r', a'*

(ha( (h a((r ) 'o( )// hr +)*a'c a'* co'/ )6

(h ar +)9' (o a' a*o-()'+ -ar'(. (t is the best

interest o' the child that ta-es precedence in adoption.

)etitioner li-ewise 'ailed to o>er in e7idence )agbilao!s 5eport

and o' the Joint $@da7it o' onsent purportedl# e;ecuted b#

her children. She also 'ailed to pro7e the a@da7it o' consent

b# her children since the same was not authenticated not

ac-nowledged be'ore a )hilippine onsular ?@ce.

&he $ ruled that petitioner was not stable enough to support

the children and is onl# rel#ing on the fnancial bac-ing,

support and commitment o' her children and her siblings. Th

a, ho9r, /(a(/ (ha( )( )/ (h a*o-(r ho /ho*

)' a -o/)()o' (o -ro9)* /--or( )' -)'+ )(h (ha'/ o6 (h 6a). Th a))( (o /--or( (h

a*o-(/ )/ -r/o'a (o (h a*o-(r, a/ a*o-()o' o'

cra(/ a +a ra()o' (' (h 6orr a'* (h

a((r. Boreo7er, the records do not pro7e nor support

petitioner!s allegation that her siblings and her children are

fnanciall# able and that the# are willing to support the minors

herein.

hile the ourt recogniFes that petitioner has onl# the best o'

intentions 'or her nieces and nephew, there are legal

infrmities that militate against re7ersing the ruling o' the $.

(n an# case, petitioner is not pre7ented 'rom fling a new

petition 'or adoption o' the herein minors.

adoption cases-stephanie astorga garcia and landingin

Documents