Gauteng high court suspends mother’s parental rights as father seeks to raise daughter with wife - IOL

Mother’s parental rights suspended as Gauteng father keeps care of daughter.

A Gauteng father has asked the court to grant him parental rights over his young daughter who has been in his care for as long as she can remember, while he and his wife plan to adopt her.

The court ultimately found that it was in the child's best interests to remain in the father's care after considering a report prepared by curatrices appointed to investigate the child's circumstances.

The curatrices' report, delivered on August 28, 2026, substantially confirmed the father's account of the care he and his family had been providing to the child.

Judge Stuart Wilson said the father had demonstrated that he was a fit parent and ruled that he should be awarded the parental rights he had sought.

The child's biological mother had recently been released from prison and told the curatrices that she was willing to relinquish her parental rights.

The report found that her decision had not been made spontaneously. She had given it sustained consideration and had realistically assessed her ability to provide the child with the care and stability she needed.

However, the curatrices were reluctant to recommend permanently terminating the mother's parental rights.

They considered that, once her circumstances had stabilised, she might potentially reconsider her decision. There was no indication that she intended to do so, and she appeared to be planning a future without the child.

The court found that the father and his family had been caring for the girl for as long as she could remember.

The child was described as happy and settled in their care, while there was no suggestion that the father was unfit to care for her.

The judge said the father had demonstrated his fitness to both the curatrices and the court.

Against this background, the judge concluded that sending the matter for another investigation would not assist the parties and, more importantly, would not be in the child's best interests.

The curatrices had proposed several possible ways of determining the child's future.

These included referring the matter to the Children's Court, asking the father and biological mother to consider an agreement for shared parental rights and responsibilities, or suspending the biological mother's parental rights.

The court rejected the prospect of a shared-parenting arrangement because the biological mother did not wish to exercise any of her parental rights or responsibilities.

The judge found that there was therefore no point in asking her to negotiate an agreement to exercise rights she did not currently want.

Although the father sought parental rights and the child's future adoption was being considered, the judge was not prepared to permanently terminate the biological mother's parental rights at this stage.

Instead, the court ordered that her parental rights and responsibilities be suspended pending the finalisation of the adoption process.

This means she remains entitled to approach the court to seek the resumption of her parental rights before the father and his wife formally adopt the child.

The judge said this approach would give the mother time and an opportunity to establish greater security and stability in her life before deciding whether permanently severing her relationship with the child was what she wanted.

If her position remains unchanged and the adoption is finalised, the adoption will permanently end the possibility of her resuming those parental rights.

The court therefore allowed the child to remain in the care of the father and his family while preserving the biological mother's opportunity to reconsider her position before the adoption is completed.