In a Decision – W.A.D. v. R.M.C., (an "Unreported Decision") >> the Court Held:
The Appellate Division held, that the Partner was properly deemed to be the “Psychological Parent” and because the Parent was not able to cooperate as to parenting issues, the Partner was deemed the Parent of Primary Residence.
The Trial Court determined that plaintiff was child's psychological parent, ordered joint legal custody and designated plaintiff as the parent of primary residence. Defendant licensed foster parent and plaintiff picked up the child together in December 2011, and moved into plaintiff's residence. The parties agreed child's adoption would be in defendant's name only to expedite matters since they were a same sex couple. Defendant moved out of plaintiff's home in 2014 and plaintiff sought joint legal and physical custody of child and to have her name placed on his birth certificate.
The judge pointed out that with Parent's consent, child referred to Partner as "Mamma" and had been doing so since he could speak. The judge pointed out that both parties were referred to as the child's foster parents in various documents, and that Parent wanted to add Partner's name to the adoption. Furthermore, both parties' names appeared on holiday cards and birthday party invitations. The judge also rejected Parent's claim that Partner did not qualify as a psychological parent because Partner had not wanted children and was not involved in the decision to adopt.