Incongruous but legal

Can a sister adopt her younger brother? This is the question answered in this case of Lita.

Lita was one of the children of Mario and Ana. When she was already a practicing nurse and 32 years old, she married Jim, a lawyer and a businessman and the couple established their own conjugal home.

One year after her marriage, Lita learned that her mother still gave birth to another baby boy whom they named Al. Since Al was a sickly child from birth and because of his impairing health, Lita’s parents entrusted the custody and care of Al to Lita and Jim especially considering that Lita is a nurse.

Lita and Jim thus took care and reared Al and through the years, the couple developed a deep and profound love for Al who in turn also learned to love the couple as his “mom and dad”.

So when Al was already fours years old, Jim and Lita decided to file a petition in court for his adoption with the consent of Mario and Ana, the parents of the boy and of Lita. They testified that they have voluntarily given their consent to the adoption of their own son by his sister Lita and the latter’s husband Jim. They also submitted their written consent and conformity to said adoption declaring that they fully understand the legal consequences of their child’s adoption by their daughter Lita and her husband Jim.

The trial court however dismissed Lita and Jim’s petition. The court said that the adoption will result in an incongruous situation where the minor Al, a legitimate brother of Lita, will also be her son. Was the court correct?

No. There is no provision in the law prohibiting relatives by blood or by affinity from adopting one another. To say that adoption should not be allowed because the adopter and the adopted are related to each other is to preclude adoption among relatives no matter how far removed or in whatever degree that relationship might be. This is not the policy of the law.

The fact that the adoption in this case will result in dual relationship between the parties, where the brother will also be the son of the adopting elder sister, should not prevent the adoption. One is by nature while the other is by fiction of law.

The relationship by adoption or by fiction of law is limited to the adopting parents and does not extend to their other relatives except as expressly provided by law. Thus the adopted child cannot be considered as a relative of the ascendants and collateral relatives of the adopting parents, nor of the legitimate children they may have after the adoption. Neither are the children of the adopted considered as descendants of the adopter.

The interest and welfare of the child to be adopted should be the paramount consideration. Adoption statutes, being humane and salutary and designed to provide homes, care and education of children should be construed so as to encourage their adoption by persons who can properly rear and educate them (Santos Jr. etc. vs. Republic, L-22523, September 29, 1967, 21 SCRA, 379)

*      *      *

Books  containing  compilation  of  my  articles on Labor Law and Criminal Law Vol I and II are now available. Contact tel. 7249445 or email: [email protected].