ÿWPC) fWéwê]æc3Ðüçn’Q™¨™é:˜²í‰Û‰bïVŸñD`ºøo¼¾¡\ÎH”Y]çÐOмz¤"b…@o6²¯%w±æ0ˆ¼'þ’=Ž«–íÁÁç ¨­q2×4,¼Á¸î›9±£I”t’º»Fò‹—]:Ì–æàùzH Èÿ|/©¸ÙØù1R0N§höôÕŠC’Ê3 º°°åU›ëßOÃ*Èèï)&â"±fÃÀM+Úàõ•L¶’ÒçÜ<.TniÈI¸ñêqz‚1xò€:;>2P'ÑŽ&é¯ù³ò3hqc\,ênΊ‚M–Æ{™%¯a+\™ÓæÊ×!‹¿„XáÒl–3ÃB@ÆçÇIʬ© “¾é„k•#~4´Í™î®µ3†8kcàÎ ð‹sƒzÊû–iENQ?˜ž:cö-¢³Oh·aÐ]½QÒ¦Ù .alGªgÄ´¸@÷ ¾ÛGP=²Y:$`’º´HÖeMŠFò®;™·½;8&À¿Ám °B;§;ìa¯–蛀BÖ¢ÉaÊ~кkÑP4§.²Š»D‘#€öð%¤Éqƒ¡ÂOw61:5i~Y¨ü åΉÌ|;Q24ç3j@UÈaù¯ìb#Á\ % ^ # 0ˆ/ UN· w 4 z Ò— i x mz 0D‘ ÆÕ Æ› Æa Æ'UNíN;í=‹*EµÉ·{€…û4€V´! $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $b$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ 0ë$$$$ B%% 0¤"% D3Æ% D-ù% 0K&&&& ASq&ÆÄ& 0¤Š' 0D.( A«r(˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0»SE)â (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularl;)GRA~1Øä ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular ãÝ ƒR‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôL8ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔChapter2,€part1€of€title36€was€repealed€in€1997.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€1997€Tenn.€Pub.€Acts.€477,€ðð1€(repealing€Tenn.€CodeÐ ° ÐAnn.€ðððð€36-2-101€to€„115€(1996)).€€Tennesseeððs€new€paternity€statutes€appear€in€chapter2,€part3€of€title€36.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.Ð vÆ ÐCode€Ann.€ðððð€36-2-301€to€„322€(Supp.€1998). Ý ƒR‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôL8ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔContrary€to€the€Snydersðð€description€of€the€trial€courtððs€action,€we€are€not€convinced€that€the€trial€courtÐ ° Ðdismissed€the€Snydersðð€intervening€petition€for€adoption.€€In€its€order€on€Langstonððs€motion€for€summary€judgment,€theÐ tÄ  Ðtrial€court€clearly€dismissed€the€first€petition€for€adoption€filed€by€the€Snyders.€€The€trial€court€did€not€express€itself€asÐ ° Ðclearly,€however,€when€it€entered€its€subsequent€order€on€Langstonððs€motion€to€dismiss€the€intervening€petition€forÐ tÄ Ðadoption€filed€by€the€Snyders.€€Rather€than€dismissing€the€intervening€petition,€the€trial€courtððs€order€merely€ruled€thatÐ 8ˆ Ðthe€Snyders€lacked€standing€to€pursue€their€petition€ð ðat€this€time.ðð€€Regardless€of€how€the€trial€courtððs€action€isÐ üL Ðcharacterized,€we€agree€that€the€courtððs€ruling€on€this€issue€effectively€prevented€the€Snyders€from€pursuing€their€petitionÐ À Ðto€adopt€the€child. ¿Ý ƒR‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôL8ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€reject€the€Snydersðð€contention€that€they€had€physical€custody€of€the€child€until€April28,€1998,€by€virtueÐ ° Ðof€the€fact€that€the€Mother€and€the€child€resided€in€the€Snydersðð€home€until€that€date.€€Even€if€the€childððs€residence€in€theÐ tÄ ÐSnydersðð€home€could€be€characterized€as€physical€custody€by€the€Snyders,€we€note€that€this€custody€arrangement€did€notÐ 8ˆ Ðexist€on€May19,€1998,€when€the€Snyders€filed€their€petition€for€adoption,€or€at€any€other€time€during€these€adoptionÐ üL Ðproceedings. qÝ ƒR‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôL8ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€also€reject€the€Snydersðð€contention€that€the€trial€court€should€have€conducted€a€full€and€fair€hearing€toÐ ° Ðexplore€the€issues€of€duress€and€undue€influence€relative€to€the€Motherððs€execution€of€the€surrender€in€favor€of€Langston.€Ð tÄ ÐThe€Mother€has€not€attempted€to€revoke€the€surrender,€and€the€Snydersðð€intervening€petition€for€adoption€contains€noÐ 8ˆ Ðallegations€of€any€deficiencies€in€the€Motherððs€execution€of€the€surrender.€€ {Ý ƒR‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôL8ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔDuring€the€adoption€hearing,€the€trial€court€indicated€that€it€also€would€allow€the€Snyders€ð ðto€take€the€standÐ ° Ðand€testify€as€to€why€they€[felt]€it€[was]€not€in€the€best€interest€of€this€child€to€be€placed€with€Ms.€Langston;ðð€however,Ð tÄ Ðthe€Snyders€did€not€take€advantage€of€this€opportunity.€€We€also€note€that€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€failed€to€present€any€otherÐ 8ˆ Ðevidence€to€this€effect,€either€by€lay€or€expert€testimony.€€ *Ý ƒR‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôL8ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔFor€purposes€of€this€appeal,€we€will€presume€that€the€Snyders€had€standing€to€assert€the€childððs€constitutionalÐ ° Ðrights€in€these€adoption€proceedings;€however,€we€note€that,€as€a€general€rule,€a€litigant€does€not€have€standing€to€assertÐ tÄ Ðanother€personððs€legal€rights.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòAllenv.€Wrightó óóó,€468€U.S.€737,€751€(1984);€òòò òStatev.€Samsó óóó,€802€S.W.2d€635,€637€n.3Ð 8ˆ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990);€ò òòòBentleyv.€Stateó óóó,€552€S.W.2d€778,€780€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1977);€ò òòòsee€alsoó óóó€ò òòòMcCannv.Ð þN ÐWeathersó óóó,€No.€02A01„9704„CH„00092,€1997€WL€607491,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct.1,€1997)€(òòò òno€perm.€app.€filedó óóó);Ð Ä Ðò òòòTennessee€Med.€Assððnv.€Corkeró óóó,€No.€01A01„9410„CH„00494,€1995€WL€228681,€at€*3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Apr.19,€1995)Ð ŠÚ Ð(ò òòòno€perm.€app.€filedó óóó). LÝ ƒR‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôL8ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔSome€courts€have€suggested€that€this€right€has€constitutional€implications€because€it€is€related€to€theÐ ° Ðfundamental€right€of€parents€to€make€decisions€concerning€the€care,€custody,€and€control€of€their€children.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòIn€re€T.J.ó óóó,Ð tÄ Ð666€A.2d€1,€11„13€(D.C.€1995),€ò òòòcert.€deniedó óóó,€518€U.S.€1028€(1996);€ò òòòFreemanv.€Chaplicó óóó,€446€N.E.2d€1369,€1374„76Ð :Š Ð(Mass.€1983). - ù-(|G2‘$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U<»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô0ò»»Ô d(|3Íü$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U<»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Íü$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U<»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€U<» »d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼óл»»ÔÑ8€:¬XXdê» »d 8ÑÑ  Ñà@ü ü ìàÔ‡îÿ óÐÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@õõ%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼óл îîÿ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓApril€20,€2000€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡X²¼X»¼óÐÔÌò òÔ#†¼óлXX²¼ñ#ÔIn€Re€ADOPTION€OF€M.J.Sòòóó.òòóóÔ‡X²¼X»¼óÐÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNos.€A5151„1,€A5153„3(1)€€€€€€Walter€L.€Evans,€ChancellorÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W1999„00197„COA„R3„CV€„€Filed€October€5,€2000€Ð ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓCindyG.€Snyder€and€WolfgangW.€Snyder€appeal€the€trial€courtððs€final€decree€of€adoption€thatÐ xÈ  Ðpermitted€Appellee€Debra€Sue€Langston€to€adopt€the€Snydersðð€fourteen„month„old€grandson,€M.J.S.€Ð d´ ÐThe€Snydersðð€daughter,€ChristineL.€Snyder,€previously€had€delivered€physical€custody€of€the€childÐ P  Ðto€Langston€and€had€executed€a€surrender€of€her€parental€rights€in€favor€of€Langston.€€Both€theÐ <Œ ÐSnyders€and€Langston€filed€petitions€seeking€to€adopt€the€child,€and€the€petitions€were€consolidatedÐ (x Ðin€one€action.€€The€trial€court€permitted€the€Snyders€to€participate€in€the€adoption€proceedings€forÐ d Ðthe€purpose€of€litigating€the€best€interests€of€the€child;€however,€the€trial€court€refused€to€allow€theÐ P ÐSnyders€to€pursue€their€own€petition€for€adoption€of€the€child€based€on€the€courtððs€ruling€thatÐ ì< ÐTennesseeððs€adoption€statutes€did€not€give€the€Snyders€standing€to€adopt€the€child.€€Based€upon€ourÐ Ø( Ðinterpretation€of€Tennesseeððs€adoption€statutes,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€committed€noÐ Ä Ðreversible€error€in€conducting€these€adoption€proceedings,€and€we€affirm€the€courtððs€final€decree€ofÐ ° Ðadoption.Ð œì Ðò òó óÔ#†¼óлXX²¼[#ÔÔ‡X²¼X»¼óÐÔÓsÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€Court€Affirmed;€andÐ tÄ ÐRemandedó óÐ `° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼óлàX²¼ô #ÔÔ‡X²¼X.¼óÐÔDavid€R.€Farmer,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court.€òò€Alan€E.€Highers,€J.,€óófiled€a€concurringÐ 8!ˆ  Ðopinion.òò€óó€òòÔ_ÔHewittÔ_Ô€P.€Tomlin,€Jr.,€Sp.€J.óó,€filed€a€dissenting€opinion.€Ð $"t! ÐÌRichard€A.€Gordon,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellants,€Cindy€G.€Snyder€and€WolfgangW.Ð ü#L# ÐSnyder.Ð è$8 $ ÐÌDiana€L.€Schmied,€Germantown,€Tennessee,€and€Hayden€Lait,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€theÐ À&"& Ðappellee,€Debra€Sue€Langston.Ð ¬'ü"' ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter,€and€Dianne€Stamey€Dycus,€Deputy€AttorneyÐ „)Ô$) ÐGeneral,€for€the€State€of€Tennessee.Ð p*À%* ÐÌÌò òó óÔ#†¼óлXX²¼â #ÔÔ‡X²¼X»¼óÐÔÓ³ ÓÐ 4-„(-ý Ðò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼óлXX²¼#ÔÔ‡X²¼X»¼óÐÔÐ ° ÐòòóóÔ#†¼óлXX²¼y#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X²¼X»¼óÐÔÌà  àOn€May19,€1998,€the€Snyders€filed€a€petition€seeking€to€adopt€their€grandson,€M.J.S.,€whoÐ ˆØ Ðwas€born€in€December€1997.€€The€Snydersðð€petition€for€adoption€alleged€that€the€child€and€hisÐ tÄ Ðmother,€ChristineL.€Snyder(Mother),€had€lived€with€the€Snyders€until€April28,€1998.€€At€the€timeÐ `° Ðthey€filed€their€petition,€the€Snyders€did€not€have€custody€of€the€child,€and€they€were€uncertain€as€toÐ L œ Ðthe€childððs€or€the€Motherððs€whereabouts.€€The€Snyders€recently€had€obtained€information,€however,Ð 8 ˆ Ðthat€the€Mother€had€surrendered€her€parental€rights€to€the€child,€that€the€child€was€residing€withÐ $ t ÐDebra€Sue€Langston€at€an€unknown€address,€and€that€Langston€had€filed€a€petition€to€adopt€the€child.€Ð  ` ÐBased€on€this€information,€the€Snydersðð€petition€named€Langston,€the€Mother,€and€the€childððsÐ ü L  Ðunknown€father€as€respondents.€€In€the€event€Langston€had€filed€a€petition€seeking€to€adopt€the€child,Ð è 8  Ðthe€Snyders€asked€the€trial€court€to€deem€their€petition€for€adoption€as€ð ða€petition€to€interveneÐ Ô$  Ðtherein.ðð€€Ð À  ÐÌà  àContrary€to€the€Snydersðð€belief,€Langston€had€not€yet€filed€a€petition€seeking€to€adopt€theÐ ˜è  Ðchild.€€The€next€day,€however,€Langston€filed€a€petition€for€adoption€of€the€child.€€LangstonððsÐ „Ô  Ðpetition€alleged€that€she€acquired€custody€of€the€child€from€the€Mother€on€May2,€1998,€that€theÐ pÀ ÐMother€surrendered€her€parental€rights€to€the€child€in€favor€of€Langston€before€a€judge€of€theÐ \¬ ÐJuvenile€Court€of€Shelby€County€on€May8,€1998,€and€that,€since€that€date,€the€child€had€residedÐ H˜ Ðcontinuously€in€Langstonððs€home.€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àInitially,€the€petitions€for€adoption€of€the€child€were€assigned€to€different€parts€of€theÐ  \ ÐChancery€Court€of€Shelby€County.€€In€response€to€Langstonððs€petition,€the€Chancellor€of€Part€III€ofÐ øH Ðthe€Chancery€Court€entered€an€Order€of€Reference€whereby€the€Chancellor€appointed€the€AdoptionÐ ä4 ÐResource€Center€as€the€childððs€next€friend.€€The€Order€of€Reference€directed€that€agency€toÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àinvestigate€the€condition€and€antecedents€of€the€child€for€the€purpose€of€ascertainingÐ ¨ø Ðwhether€he€is€a€proper€subject€for€adoption,€to€make€appropriate€inquiry€to€determineÐ ”ä Ðwhether€the€proposed€adoptive€home€is€a€suitable€one€for€the€child,€and€to€investigateÐ €Ð Ðany€other€circumstances€or€conditions€which€may€have€a€bearing€on€the€adoption€andÐ l¼ Ðof€which€the€Court€should€have€knowledge.€€ÐX ¨Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€Chancellor€of€Part€III€subsequently€entered€an€order€transferring€Langstonððs€adoptionÐ 0"€  Ðpetition€to€PartI€of€the€Chancery€Court€for€consolidation€with€the€Snydersðð€adoption€petition.€Ð #l! ÐThereafter,€all€proceedings€in€the€consolidated€actions€took€place€in€PartI€of€the€Chancery€Court.€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àLangston€responded€to€the€Snydersðð€petition€for€adoption€by€filing€a€motion€to€dismiss€theÐ à%0!$ Ðpetition.€€In€support€of€her€motion€to€dismiss,€Langston€contended€that€the€Snyders€had€not€met€theÐ Ì&"% Ðstatutory€requirements€for€filing€an€adoption€petition€because€they€had€neither€physical€custody€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€child€nor€the€right€to€receive€physical€custody€of€the€child€pursuant€to€the€applicable€provisionsÐ ¤(ô#' Ðof€Tennesseeððs€adoption€statutes.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€36-1-111(d)(6),€36-1-115(b),Ð )à$( Ð36-1-116(b)(5)€(1996&€Supp.€1998).€€On€the€same€day€that€Langston€filed€her€motion€to€dismiss,Ð |*Ì%) Ðthe€Snyders€filed€a€motion€in€which€they€sought€various€forms€of€relief,€including€the€return€of€theÐ h+¸&* Ðchild€to€their€home,€access€to€confidential€information€pertaining€to€Langstonððs€adoption€of€the€child,Ð ° Ðand€the€right€to€intervene€in€Langstonððs€adoption€proceedings.€€Ð œì ÐÌà  àOn€June25,€1998,€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€denying€Langstonððs€motion€to€dismiss€theÐ tÄ ÐSnydersðð€adoption€petition.€€In€a€separate€order,€the€trial€court€declined€to€act€on€the€Snydersðð€requestÐ `° Ðfor€the€return€of€the€child€to€their€home;€however,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€the€Snydersðð€petition€forÐ L œ Ðadoption€would€be€deemed€a€petition€to€intervene€in€the€pending€adoption€proceedings€brought€byÐ 8 ˆ ÐLangston,€and€the€court€permitted€all€parties€and€their€attorneys€to€have€access€to€certain€documentsÐ $ t Ðpertaining€to€the€pending€adoption€proceedings.€€Langston€requested€permission€from€the€trial€courtÐ  ` Ðto€pursue€an€interlocutory€appeal€of€these€rulings,€but€the€trial€court€denied€Langstonððs€request.€€ò òòòSeeó óóóÐ ü L  ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.9.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àIn€October€1998,€Langston€filed€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€in€which€she€again€askedÐ À  Ðthe€trial€court€to€dismiss€the€Snydersðð€adoption€petition.€€In€support€of€her€motion,€LangstonÐ ¬ü  Ðreiterated€her€argument€that€the€Snyders€had€failed€to€meet€the€statutory€requirements€for€filing€anÐ ˜è  Ðadoption€petition€because€the€Snyders€had€neither€physical€custody€of€the€child€nor€the€right€toÐ „Ô  Ðreceive€physical€custody€of€the€child€pursuant€to€the€applicable€provisions€of€Tennesseeððs€adoptionÐ pÀ Ðstatutes.€€Langston€additionally€challenged€the€Snydersðð€right€to€intervene€in€the€pending€adoptionÐ \¬ Ðproceedings.€€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àIn€their€memorandum€of€law€and€response€opposing€Langstonððs€motion€for€summaryÐ  p Ðjudgment,€the€Snyders€acknowledged€that€the€Mother€had€surrendered€her€parental€rights€to€the€childÐ  \ Ðand€had€delivered€physical€custody€of€the€child€to€Langston.€€Nevertheless,€the€Snyders€insisted€that,Ð øH Ðin€order€to€protect€the€childððs€best€interests,€the€trial€court€was€required€to€conduct€a€hearing€on€theÐ ä4 Ðmerits€of€both€adoption€petitions€to€determine€which€of€the€petitioners,€the€Snyders€or€Langston,Ð Ð  Ðshould€be€permitted€to€adopt€the€child.€€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àDespite€the€Snydersðð€objection€that€the€childððs€best€interests€could€be€served€only€by€holdingÐ ”ä Ða€contested€hearing€on€both€adoption€petitions,€the€trial€court€granted€Langstonððs€motion€forÐ €Ð Ðsummary€judgment€and€dismissed€the€Snydersðð€petition€for€adoption.€€In€support€of€its€ruling€thatÐ l¼ Ðthe€Snyders€lacked€standing€to€file€an€ð ðindependent€adoption€petition,ðð€the€trial€court€observed€thatÐ X ¨ Ðthe€following€facts€were€undisputed:€€Langston€received€physical€custody€of€the€child€from€theÐ D!” ÐMother€on€May2,€1998;€the€Mother€lawfully€surrendered€the€child€to€Langston€in€the€Juvenile€CourtÐ 0"€  Ðof€Shelby€County€on€May8,€1998;€Langston€had€maintained€physical€custody€of€the€child€sinceÐ #l! ÐMay2,€1998;€and€the€Snyders€did€not€have€custody€of€the€child€at€the€time€they€filed€their€adoptionÐ $X" Ðpetition€on€May19,€1998.€€The€trial€court€indicated€that€it€was€making€no€determination€on€theÐ ô$D # ÐSnydersðð€right€to€intervene€in€the€pending€adoption€proceedings€ð ðat€this€time,ðð€but€the€court€ruledÐ à%0!$ Ðthat€the€Snyders€would€ð ðbe€allowed€to€be€heard€in€the€adoption€hearingðð€and€that€the€SnydersððÐ Ì&"% Ðattorney€would€ð ðbe€allowed€to€cross„examine€witnesses€and€present€deposition€testimony€and€presentÐ ¸'#& Ðevidence€as€to€the€best€interest€and€welfare€of€the€child.ðð€€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àAfter€the€trial€court€orally€granted€Langstonððs€motion€for€summary€judgment,€but€before€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðcourt€had€entered€a€written€order€containing€its€rulings,€the€Snyders€filed€another€pleading€that€theyÐ h+¸&* Ðtitled€ð ðIntervening€Petition€for€Adoption.ðð€€The€intervening€petition€alleged,€ò òòòinter€aliaó óóó,€that€theÐ ° ÐMother€had€surrendered€her€parental€rights€to€the€child,€that€the€child€was€in€the€physical€custody€ofÐ œì ÐLangston,€and€that€the€Snyders€did€not€presently€have€custody€of€the€child.€€As€authority€for€theirÐ ˆØ Ðintervening€petition,€the€Snyders€referenced€the€provisions€of€section€36-1-116(f)(1)€of€TennesseeððsÐ tÄ Ðadoption€statutes.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-116(f)(1)€(Supp.€1998).€€Ð `° ÐÌà  àLangston€responded€to€the€Snydersðð€Intervening€Petition€for€Adoption€by€filing€anotherÐ 8 ˆ Ðmotion€to€dismiss.€€In€addition€to€repeating€her€argument€that€the€Snyders€had€failed€to€meet€theÐ $ t Ðstatutory€requirements€for€filing€an€adoption€petition,€Langston€contended€that€the€cited€provisionsÐ  ` Ðof€the€adoption€statutes€did€not€give€the€Snyders€any€right€to€intervene€in€the€pending€adoptionÐ ü L  Ðproceedings.€€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àIn€its€subsequent€order€entered€on€Langstonððs€motion,€the€trial€court€stopped€short€ofÐ À  Ðdismissing€the€Snydersðð€intervening€petition.€€Instead,€the€trial€court€ruled€that€the€Snyders€had€ð ðnoÐ ¬ü  Ðstanding€ò òòòat€this€timeó óóó€to€petition€for€adoptionðð€but€that€the€Snyders€would€be€allowed€to€intervene€inÐ ˜è  Ðthe€pending€adoption€proceedings€for€the€limited€purpose€of€presenting€evidence€as€to€LangstonððsÐ „Ô  Ðfitness.€€The€trial€courtððs€order€also€disposed€of€several€pretrial€motions€filed€by€the€Snyders.€€In€oneÐ pÀ Ðof€its€rulings,€the€trial€court€agreed€to€consider€information€that€had€been€filed€in€the€SnydersððÐ \¬ Ðadoption€proceedings.€€The€trial€court€indicated€that€it€would€consider€this€information,€however,Ð H˜ Ðð ðsolely€on€the€issue€of€guardianship€in€the€event€[Langstonððs]€petition€[was]€denied.ðð€€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àAfter€conducting€a€hearing€on€Langstonððs€petition,€the€trial€court€entered€a€final€decreeÐ  \ Ðgranting€the€adoption€to€Langston.€€On€appeal€from€this€final€decree,€the€Snyders€contend€that€theÐ øH Ðtrial€court€erred€in€(1)granting€Langstonððs€motion€for€summary€judgment€and€dismissing€theÐ ä4 ÐSnydersðð€petition€for€adoption,€(2)permitting€the€Snyders€to€intervene€for€the€limited€purpose€ofÐ Ð  Ðlitigating€the€best€interest€and€welfare€of€the€child,€(3)accepting€the€home€study€report€and€approvingÐ ¼  Ðthe€recommendation€of€Anne€McGinnis€of€the€Adoption€Resource€Center,€and€(4)determining€thatÐ ¨ø Ðthe€proposed€adoptive€home€of€Langston€was€a€suitable€one€for€the€child.€€The€Snyders€also€attackÐ ”ä ÐTennesseeððs€adoption€statutes€on€various€constitutional€grounds,€contending€that€the€statutes€fail€toÐ €Ð Ðadequately€protect€the€constitutional€rights€of€the€child.€€Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àWe€first€address€the€Snydersðð€contention€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€LangstonððsÐ D!” Ðmotion€for€summary€judgment,€thereby€dismissing€the€Snydersðð€petition€for€adoption€and€permittingÐ 0"€  Ðthe€Snyders€to€intervene€for€the€limited€purpose€of€litigating€the€best€interest€and€welfare€of€the€child.€Ð #l! ÐIn€addressing€this€contention,€we€are€mindful€that€summary€judgment€is€appropriate€only€when€theÐ $X" Ðpartiesðð€ð ðpleadings,€depositions,€answers€to€interrogatories,€and€admissions€on€file,€together€with€theÐ ô$D # Ðaffidavits,€if€any,€show€that€there€is€no€genuine€issue€as€to€any€material€fact€and€that€the€moving€partyÐ à%0!$ Ðis€entitled€to€a€judgment€as€a€matter€of€law.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€56.04.€€In€determining€whether€or€notÐ Ì&"% Ða€genuine€issue€of€material€fact€exists€for€purposes€of€summary€judgment,€the€courts€are€required€toÐ ¸'#& Ðconsider€the€question€in€the€same€manner€as€a€motion€for€directed€verdict€made€at€the€close€of€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðplaintiffððs€proof.€€ò òòòSeeóóó ó€ò òòòByrdv.€Halló óóó,€847€S.W.2d€208,€210€(Tenn.€1993).€€That€is,€the€trial€court,€andÐ )à$( Ðâ âthis€court€on€appeal,€ð ðmust€take€the€strongest€legitimate€view€of€the€evidence€in€favor€of€theÐ |*Ì%) Ðnonmoving€party,€allow€all€reasonable€inferences€in€favor€of€that€party,€and€discard€all€countervailingÐ ° Ðevidence.ðð€€ò òòòIdó óóó.€at€210„11.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àWe€begin€our€analysis€of€this€issue€with€a€brief€overview€of€what€we€perceive€to€be€theÐ tÄ Ðrelevant€provisions€of€Tennesseeððs€adoption€statutes.€€The€legislature€has€stated€that€the€primaryÐ `° Ðpurpose€of€the€adoption€statutes€ð ðis€to€provide€means€and€procedures€for€the€adoption€of€children€andÐ L œ Ðadults€that€recognize€and€effectuate€to€the€greatest€extent€possible€the€rights€and€interests€of€personsÐ 8 ˆ Ðaffected€by€adoption.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-101(a)€(Supp.€1998).€€Among€other€rights€andÐ $ t Ðinterests,€the€adoption€statutes€strive€to€protect€ð ðthe€rights€of€all€persons€who€are€affected€by€[theÐ  ` Ðadoption]€process€and€who€should€be€entitled€to€notice€of€the€proceedings€for€the€adoption€of€aÐ ü L  Ðchild,ðð€the€interests€of€adopted€children€in€achieving€permanency€ð ðat€the€earliest€possible€date,ðð€theÐ è 8  Ðrights€of€adopted€children€to€be€free€ð ðfrom€any€interference€by€any€person€who€may€have€some€legalÐ Ô$  Ðclaim€after€the€child€has€become€properly€adjusted€to€the€childððs€adoptive€home,ðð€and,€similarly,€theÐ À  Ðrights€of€adoptive€parents€to€be€free€ð ðfrom€the€later€disturbance€of€their€parental€relationship€withÐ ¬ü  Ðtheir€child.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-101(a)(4)ð!ð(6),€(b)(3)€(Supp.€1998).€€Above€all,€however,€theÐ ˜è  Ðadoption€statutes€strive€to€protect€the€ð ðbest€interestsðð€of€children€who€are€involved€in€the€adoptiveÐ „Ô  Ðprocess.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-101(a),€(d)€(Supp.€1998).Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àTennesseeððs€adoption€statutes€limit€the€parties€who€may€bring€an€adoption€proceeding€in€thisÐ H˜ Ðstate€by€imposing€certain€requirements€on€such€parties.€€Some€of€these€requirements€include€that€theÐ 4„ Ðpetitioner€be€over€eighteen€years€of€age,€ò òòòseeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-115(a)€(1996),€that€theÐ  p Ðpetitioner€be€a€resident€of€this€state,€subject€to€certain€exceptions,€ò òòòseeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ  \ Ð36-1-115(d)ð!ð(f)€(1996),€and€that€any€living€spouse€of€the€petitioner€join€in€the€petition€if€the€spouseÐ øH Ðis€competent€to€do€so,€ò òòòseeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-115(c)€(1996).Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àThe€adoption€statutes€additionally€require€that€the€petitioners€have€either€physical€custodyÐ ¼  Ðof€the€child€or€the€right€to€receive€custody€of€the€child€pursuant€to€a€validly€executed€surrender.€€ò òòòSeeó óóóÐ ¨ø ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-115(b)€(1996).€€In€accordance€with€this€requirement,€the€adoption€statutesÐ ”ä Ðprovide€that€the€petition€for€adoption€must€state€ð ð[t]hat€the€petitioners€have€physical€custody€of€theÐ €Ð Ðchild€or€that€they€meet€the€requirements€of€ðð36-1-111(d)(6)€[regarding€validity€of€surrenders],€andÐ l¼ Ðfrom€what€person€or€agency€such€custody€was€or€is€to€be€obtained.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ X ¨ Ð36-1-116(b)(5)€(Supp.€1998).Ð D!” ÐÌà  àIn€the€context€of€adoptions€involving€a€surrender€or€parental€consent,€Tennesseeððs€adoptionÐ #l! Ðstatutes€permit€biological€parents€to€surrender€their€parental€rights€to€a€child€in€favor€of€a€particularÐ $X" Ðperson€or€agency.€€The€statutes€define€ð ðsurrenderðð€as€ð ða€document€executed€under€the€provisions€ofÐ ô$D # Ððð36-1-111€or€under€the€laws€of€another€state€or€territory€or€country,€by€the€parent€or€guardian€of€aÐ à%0!$ Ðchild,€by€which€that€parent€or€guardian€relinquishes€all€parental€or€guardianship€rights€of€that€parentÐ Ì&"% Ðor€guardian€to€a€child,€òòò òto€another€person€or€public€child€welfare€agency€or€licensed€child„placingÐ ¸'#& Ðagencyó óóó€for€the€purposes€of€making€that€child€available€for€adoption.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ ¤(ô#' Ð36-1-102(45)€(Supp.€1998)€(emphasis€added).€€The€statutes€provide€that€ð ð[a]€surrender€or€parentalÐ )à$( Ðconsent€may€be€made€or€given€òòò òto€any€prospective€adoptive€parent€who€has€attained€eighteen(18)Ð |*Ì%) Ðyears€of€age,€the€department,€or€a€licensed€child„placing€agencyó óóó€in€accordance€with€the€provisionsÐ h+¸&* Ðof€this€section.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-111(c)€(Supp.€1998)€(emphasis€added).€€Thus,€the€statutesÐ ° Ðallow€a€biological€parent€to€surrender€a€child€directly€to€a€prospective€adoptive€parent€chosen€by€theÐ œì Ðbiological€parent.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòidó óóó.;€ò òòòsee€alsoó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-111(l),€(m),€(q)(1)€(Supp.€1998).Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àAlthough€a€biological€parent€has€the€right€to€make€the€initial€choice€of€his€or€her€childððsÐ `° Ðadoptive€parent,€the€biological€parentððs€right€to€choose€the€childððs€adoptive€parent€is€not€absolute.€Ð L œ ÐIn€filing€an€adoption€petition,€the€prospective€adoptive€parent€must€allege,€ò òòòinter€aliaó óóó,€that€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðpetitioner€is€a€fit€person€ð ðto€have€the€care€and€custody€of€the€child€and€that€it€is€in€the€best€interestÐ $ t Ðof€the€child€for€this€adoption€to€occur.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-116(b)(9)€(Supp.€1998).€€In€its€finalÐ  ` Ðorder€of€adoption,€the€trial€court€must€find€ð ð[t]hat€the€adoption€is€for€the€best€interest€of€the€child.ðð€Ð ü L  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-120(a)(13)€(1996).€€Thus,€the€biological€parentððs€choice€of€an€adoptiveÐ è 8  Ðparent€is€always€subject€to€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€the€proposed€adoption€is€in€the€childððsÐ Ô$  Ðbest€interests.Ð À  ÐÌà  àThe€adoption€statutes€contemplate€different€types€of€intervention€by€interested€parties.€Ð ˜è  ÐTennesseeððs€paternity€statutes€permit€the€putative€father€of€a€child€for€whom€an€adoption€petition€hasÐ „Ô  Ðbeen€filed€to€file€a€complaint€to€establish€parentage€or€to€intervene€in€the€adoption€proceedings€byÐ pÀ Ðfiling€a€complaint€in€the€court€in€which€the€adoption€petition€is€pending.€€If€the€putative€fatherÐ \¬ Ðchooses€this€course€of€action,€he€may€pursue€his€complaint€to€establish€his€parentage€of€the€child,Ð H˜ Ðor€he€may€intervene€for€the€purpose€of€presenting€a€defense€to€the€adoption€petition.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ 4„ ÐAnn.€ðððð€36-2-307(c),€36-2-318(j)€(Supp.€1998).€€In€such€cases,€the€court€hearing€the€adoptionÐ  p Ðpetition€has€exclusive€jurisdiction€to€determine€the€issue€of€parentage.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ  \ Ð36-2-307(c)(3)€(Supp.€1998).Ð øH ÐÌà  àMoreover,€in€cases€involving€a€child€who€is€the€subject€of€a€surrender,€parental€consent,€orÐ Ð  Ðguardianship€order,€Tennesseeððs€adoption€statutes€authorize€ð ðany€personðð€who€is€interested€in€theÐ ¼  Ðchildððs€welfare€to€intervene€in€a€surrender€or€adoption€proceeding€for€the€purpose€of€presentingÐ ¨ø Ðevidence€regarding€the€best€interests€of€the€child.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-111(u)(2)€(Supp.Ð ”ä Ð1998).€€Specifically,€the€statutes€authorize€the€Department€of€Childrenððs€Services(DCS),€a€licensedÐ €Ð Ðchild„placing€agency,€a€licensed€clinical€social€worker,€or€ð ðany€personðð€to€intervene€in€theÐ l¼ Ðproceeding€by€filing€a€sworn€complaint€that€ð ðseeks€to€present€proof€concerning€the€best€interests€ofÐ X ¨ Ðthe€child.ðð€€ò òòòIdó óóó.;€ò òòòcfó óóó.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-116(k)(1)€(Supp.€1998)€(authorizing€DCS€or€licensedÐ D!” Ðagency€or€social€worker€to€intervene€in€any€adoption€proceeding€for€purpose€of€litigating€childððs€bestÐ 0"€  Ðinterests).€€The€party€seeking€to€intervene€may€file€the€complaint€ð ðin€the€court€where€the€surrenderÐ #l! Ðwas€executed€or€filed€or€where€the€adoption€petition€containing€a€parental€consent€was€filed.ðð€€Tenn.Ð $X" ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€36-1-111(u)(3)€(Supp.€1998).€€After€conducting€a€final€hearing€on€the€complaint,€if€theÐ ô$D # Ðtrial€court€finds€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€such€action€is€in€the€best€interests€of€the€child,Ð à%0!$ Ðthe€trial€court€may€ð ðenter€an€order€removing€the€child€from€the€prospective€adoptive€parents€or€otherÐ Ì&"% Ðcustodian€or€guardian€of€the€child.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-111(v)(4)€(Supp.€1998).€€In€that€event,Ð ¸'#& Ðthe€trial€court€ð ðmay€award€temporary€legal€custody€giving€any€person,€[DCS]€or€[a]€licensed€child„Ð ¤(ô#' Ðplacing€agency,€or€a€child„caring€agency,€the€care€and€custody€of€the€child.ðð€€ò òòòIdó óóó.;€ò òòòcfó óóó.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð )à$( Ðâ âðð€36-1-116(k)(7)€(Supp.€1998)€(authorizing€trial€court€to€remove€child€from€custody€of€prospectiveÐ |*Ì%) Ðadoptive€parents,€dismiss€adoption€petition,€and€make€alternate€disposition€if€court€finds€by€clear€andÐ ° Ðconvincing€evidence€that€such€action€is€in€childððs€best€interests).Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àThe€adoption€statutes€contemplate€another€type€of€intervention€where€a€third€party€files€aÐ tÄ Ðpetition€seeking€to€adopt€the€same€child€that€is€subject€to€a€pending€adoption€petition.€€With€oneÐ `° Ðnotable€exception,€a€third€party€who€files€an€intervening€petition€seeking€to€adopt€a€child€must€meetÐ L œ Ðall€of€the€statutory€requirements€for€filing€an€adoption€petition.€€That€is,€the€person€must€be€overÐ 8 ˆ Ðeighteen€years€of€age,€the€personððs€spouse€must€join€in€the€petition€(if€the€person€has€a€living€spouseÐ $ t Ðwho€is€competent€to€do€so),€and€the€person€must€be€a€resident€of€this€state€(unless€the€person€isÐ  ` Ðrelated€to€the€child€or€is€in€military€service€stationed€out€of€this€state).€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ ü L  Ð36-1-115(a),€(c),€(d),€(e),€(f)€(1996).Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àIn€order€to€file€an€intervening€petition€for€adoption,€however,€the€petitioner€need€not€haveÐ À  Ðphysical€custody€of€the€child€or€the€right€to€receive€custody€of€the€child€because€the€adoption€statutesÐ ¬ü  Ðspecifically€except€such€intervenors€from€the€statutesðð€custody€requirement.€€Specifically,€theÐ ˜è  Ðpertinent€provision€of€the€adoption€statutes€states€thatÐ „Ô  ÐÌà8  àà ` à[t]he€petitioners€must€have€physical€custody€or€must€demonstrate€to€the€courtÐ \¬ Ðthat€they€have€the€right€to€receive€custody€of€the€child€sought€to€be€adopted€asÐ H˜ Ðprovided€in€ðð36-1-111(d)(6)€at€the€time€the€petition€is€filed,€ò òòòunless€they€are€Ô& œ ÔfilingÐ 4„ Ðan€intervening€petition€seeking€to€adopt€the€childóóó ó.Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-115(b)€(1996)€(emphasis€added).Ô'œ4inÔÐ øH ÐÓÓà  àAlthough€persons€who€file€an€intervening€petition€seeking€to€adopt€a€child€need€not€haveÐ Ð  Ðphysical€custody€or€the€right€to€receive€custody€of€the€child€at€the€time€they€file€their€petition,€otherÐ ¼  Ðprovisions€of€the€adoption€statutes€indicate€that,€in€order€to€prevail€on€their€petition€to€adopt€theÐ ¨ø Ðchild,€the€intervening€petitioners€must€meet€the€statutesðð€custody€requirement€at€some€point€in€theÐ ”ä Ðadoption€proceedings.€€The€adoption€statutes€provide€that€a€petition€for€adoption€must€state€ð ð[t]hatÐ €Ð Ðthe€petitioners€have€physical€custody€of€the€child€or€that€they€meet€the€requirements€ofÐ l¼ Ððð36-1-111(d)(6)€[regarding€validity€of€surrenders],€and€from€what€person€or€agency€such€custodyÐ X ¨ Ðwas€or€is€to€be€obtained.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-116(b)(5)€(Supp.€1998).€€Although€sectionÐ D!” Ð36-1-115(b)€of€the€adoption€statutes€excepts€intervening€petitioners€from€this€custody€requirement,Ð 0"€  Ðsection€36-1-116(b)(5)€does€not.€€ò òòòCompareó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-115(b)€(1996),€ò òòòwithó óóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ #l! ÐAnn.€ðð€36-1-116(b)(5)€(Supp.€1998).Ð $X" ÐÌà  àAnother€provision€of€the€adoption€statutes€provides€courts€with€guidance€when€they€are€facedÐ à%0!$ Ðwith€both€an€original€adoption€petition€and€an€intervening€adoption€petition.€€When€an€adoptionÐ Ì&"% Ðpetition€is€filed,€the€trial€court€in€which€the€petition€is€filed€has€ð ðexclusive€jurisdiction€of€all€mattersÐ ¸'#& Ðâ âpertaining€to€the€child,€including€the€establishment€of€paternity€of€a€child€pursuant€to€chapter2,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðpart1€of€this€title,׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€except€for€allegations€of€delinquency,€unruliness€or€truancy€of€the€child€pursuantÐ ° Ðâ âto€title37.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-116(f)(1)€(Supp.€1998)€(footnote€added).€€This€grant€ofÐ œì Ðjurisdiction,€however,€includes€the€following€caveat:Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  à[Ô_ÔP]rovidedÔ_Ô,€that,€unless€a€party€has€filed€an€intervening€petition€to€an€existingÐ `° Ðadoption€petition€concerning€a€child€who€is€in€the€physical€custody€of€the€originalÐ L œ Ðpetitioners,€the€court€shall€have€no€jurisdiction€to€issue€any€orders€granting€custodyÐ 8 ˆ Ðor€guardianship€of€the€child€to€the€petitioners€or€to€the€intervening€petitioners€orÐ $ t Ðgranting€an€adoption€of€the€child€to€the€petitioners€or€to€the€intervening€petitionersÐ  ` Ðunless€the€petition€affirmatively€states,€and€the€court€finds€in€its€order,€that€theÐ ü L  Ðpetitioners€have€physical€custody€of€the€child€at€the€time€of€the€filing€of€the€petition,Ð è 8  Ðentry€of€the€order€of€guardianship,€or€entry€of€the€order€of€adoption€or€unless€theÐ Ô$  Ðpetitioners€otherwise€meet€the€requirements€of€Ô& ° Ôðð36-1-111(d)(6).ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-116(f)(1)€(Supp.€1998).Ô'° °{ÔÐ ˜è  ÐÓÓà  àAlthough€the€foregoing€statute€is€not€a€model€of€clarity,€we€interpret€this€statute€to€mean€that,Ð pÀ Ðin€cases€where€an€intervening€adoption€petition€has€been€filed,€neither€the€original€petitioners€norÐ \¬ Ðthe€intervening€petitioners€will€be€granted€an€adoption€of€the€child€unless€the€trial€court€finds€thatÐ H˜ Ðthe€petitioners€have€either€physical€custody€of€the€child€or€the€right€to€receive€custody€of€the€childÐ 4„ Ðpursuant€to€a€validly€executed€surrender.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòidó óóó.€€This€interpretation€is€bolstered€by€other€provisionsÐ  p Ðof€the€adoption€statutes,€which€require€the€trial€court€to€include€in€its€final€order€of€adoption,€amongÐ  \ Ðother€findings,€ð ð[t]he€date€when€the€petitioners€acquired€physical€custody€of€the€child€and€from€whatÐ øH Ðperson€or€agency€or€by€which€court€order.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-120(a)(4)€(1996).Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àApplying€the€foregoing€principles€to€the€present€adoption€proceedings,€we€first€conclude€thatÐ ¼  Ðthe€Snyders€met€the€statutory€requirements€for€filing€an€intervening€petition€for€adoption.€€TheÐ ¨ø Ðadoption€statutes€specifically€permitted€the€Snyders€to€file€an€intervening€petition€seeking€to€adoptÐ ”ä Ðthe€child€even€if€the€Snyders€did€not€have€physical€custody€of€the€child€or€the€right€to€receive€custodyÐ €Ð Ðof€the€child€at€the€time€they€filed€their€petition.€€ò òòòSeeóóó ó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€€36-1-115(b)€(1996).€Ð l¼ ÐInasmuch€as€the€Snydersðð€petition€constituted€ð ðan€intervening€petition€seeking€to€adopt€the€child,ððÐ X ¨ Ðthe€petition€did€not€have€to€allege€that€the€Snyders€had€physical€custody€of€the€child€or€the€right€toÐ D!” Ðreceive€custody€of€the€child€pursuant€to€a€valid€surrender.€€ò òòòIdó óóó.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àNevertheless,€we€decline€to€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€final€decree€of€adoption€based€upon€theÐ $X" Ðcourtððs€refusal€to€permit€the€Snyders€to€proceed€with€their€intervening€adoption€petition.׃à×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€AlthoughÐ ô$D # Ðthe€Snyders€were€not€required€to€comply€with€the€statutory€custody€requirement€before€filing€anÐ ° Ðintervening€petition€for€adoption,€under€the€pertinent€provisions€of€the€adoption€statutes,€the€trialÐ œì Ðcourt€was€not€authorized€to€grant€the€Snyders€an€adoption€unless€the€court€found€that€the€SnydersÐ ˆØ Ðhad€physical€custody€or€the€right€to€receive€custody€of€the€child€at€some€point€during€the€adoptionÐ tÄ Ðproceedings.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€36-1-116(f)(1),€36-1-120(a)(4)€(1996€&€Supp.€1998).€€At€noÐ `° Ðtime€during€these€adoption€proceedings€did€the€Snyders€have€either€physical€custody€of€the€child€orÐ L œ Ðthe€right€to€receive€custody€of€the€child€pursuant€to€a€validly€executed€surrender.€€To€the€contrary,Ð 8 ˆ Ðit€was€undisputed€that,€at€all€times€pertinent€to€these€adoption€proceedings,€Langston€was€the€onlyÐ $ t Ðpetitioner€who€had€physical€custody€of€the€child€or€the€right€to€receive€custody€of€the€child€pursuantÐ  ` Ðto€a€valid€surrender€executed€by€the€Mother.€€In€light€of€the€undisputed€fact€that€the€Snyders€neverÐ ü L  Ðmet€the€adoption€statutesðð€custody€requirement,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€did€not€err€inÐ è 8  Ðrefusing€to€allow€the€Snyders€to€pursue€their€intervening€petition€for€adoption.׃ì×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àOn€appeal,€the€Snyders€contend€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€Langstonððs€motion€forÐ ¬ü  Ðsummary€judgment€on€this€issue€because€Langstonððs€motion€failed€to€comply€with€the€technicalÐ ˜è  Ðrequirements€of€rule€56.03€of€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€€Rule€56.03€requires€the€partyÐ „Ô  Ðmoving€for€summary€judgment€to€provide€ð ða€separate€concise€statement€of€the€material€facts€as€toÐ pÀ Ðwhich€the€moving€party€contends€there€is€no€genuine€issue€for€trial.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€56.03.€€TheÐ \¬ Ðrule€directs€the€movant€to€set€forth€each€fact€in€a€separate,€numbered€paragraph€and€to€support€eachÐ H˜ Ðfact€with€a€specific€citation€to€the€record.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòidó óóó.€€These€requirements€were€added€in€1997€to€assistÐ 4„ Ðthe€court€and€litigants€in€determining€whether€the€record€contains€a€genuine€issue€as€to€any€materialÐ  p Ðfact.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€56.03€advisory€commission€comment.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àIn€the€present€case,€Langston€supported€her€motion€for€summary€judgment€with€aÐ ä4 Ðmemorandum€of€law€that€contained€a€concise€statement€of€material€facts;€however,€Langston€failedÐ Ð  Ðto€separately€number€the€facts€or€to€support€each€fact€with€a€specific€record€citation.€€Nevertheless,Ð ¼  Ðwe€decline€to€reverse€the€trial€courtððs€summary€judgment€based€upon€Langstonððs€failure€to€complyÐ ¨ø Ðwith€rule€56.03ððs€technical€requirements.€€When€the€trial€court€granted€Langstonððs€motion€forÐ ”ä Ðsummary€judgment,€the€only€material€fact€at€issue€was€whether€the€Snyders€had€physical€custody€orÐ €Ð Ðthe€right€to€receive€custody€of€the€child€pursuant€to€Tennesseeððs€adoption€statutes.€€At€the€summaryÐ l¼ Ðjudgment€hearing,€the€Snydersðð€counsel€conceded€that€the€Snyders€had€not€met€the€adoption€statutesððÐ X ¨ Ðcustody€requirement.€€Under€these€circumstances,€we€conclude€that€the€Snyders€were€not€prejudicedÐ ° Ðby€any€technical€deficiencies€in€Langstonððs€summary€judgment€motion.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòSelvyv.€Vinsantó óóó,€No.Ð œì Ð03A01„9903„CV„00081,€1999€WL€894435,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct.13,€1999)€(ò òòòno€perm.€app.Ð ˆØ Ðfiledó óóó).€€Moreover,€we€note€that€the€Snydersðð€own€memorandum€of€law€and€response€opposingÐ tÄ ÐLangstonððs€motion€contained€many€factual€assertions€that€were€not€supported€by€citations€to€theÐ `° Ðrecord.€€Ð L œ ÐÌà  àIn€contending€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€granting€Langstonððs€motion€for€summary€judgment,Ð $ t Ðthe€Snyders€insist€that€the€trial€court€should€have€conducted€a€full€and€fair€hearing€to€determine€theÐ  ` Ðmerits€of€the€competing€petitions€for€adoption€filed€in€this€case.€€The€Snydersðð€argument€suggestsÐ ü L  Ðthat€the€trial€court€should€have€given€equal€consideration€to€Langstonððs€adoption€petition€and€theÐ è 8  ÐSnydersðð€intervening€adoption€petition€despite€the€Snydersðð€failure€to€meet€the€adoption€statutesððÐ Ô$  Ðcustody€requirement.Ð À  ÐÌà  àWe€conclude€that€this€argument€is€without€merit.€€As€we€previously€indicated,€the€adoptionÐ ˜è  Ðstatutes€did€not€authorize€the€trial€court€to€grant€the€Snydersðð€adoption€petition€because€it€wasÐ „Ô  Ðundisputed€that€the€Snyders€had€neither€physical€custody€of€the€child€nor€the€right€to€receive€custodyÐ pÀ Ðpursuant€to€the€relevant€provisions€of€the€adoption€statutes.€€In€our€view,€this€limitation€on€the€trialÐ \¬ Ðcourtððs€authority€to€grant€an€adoption€was€consistent€with€other€provisions€of€the€adoption€statutesÐ H˜ Ðthat€permitted€the€Mother,€as€the€childððs€biological€parent,€to€choose€the€childððs€prospective€adoptiveÐ 4„ Ðparent€subject€to€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€such€adoption€was€in€the€childððs€best€interests.Ð  p ÐÌà  àIn€the€present€case,€it€was€undisputed€that€the€Mother€physically€delivered€the€child€toÐ øH ÐLangston€and€that,€shortly€thereafter,€the€Mother€executed€a€surrender€designating€Langston€as€theÐ ä4 Ðchildððs€prospective€adoptive€parent.€€Under€our€current€adoption€statutes,€the€Mother€had€the€rightÐ Ð  Ðto€choose€Langston€as€the€childððs€adoptive€parent€subject€to€the€trial€courtððs€determination€that€theÐ ¼  Ðproposed€adoption€was€in€the€childððs€best€interests.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€36-1-102(45),Ð ¨ø Ð36-1-111(c),€36-1-116(b)(9),€36-1-120(a)(13)€(1996€&€Supp.€1998).€€Inasmuch€as€the€Snyders€hadÐ ”ä Ðneither€physical€custody€of€the€child€nor€the€right€to€receive€custody,€and€inasmuch€as€the€MotherÐ €Ð Ðdelivered€the€child€to€Langston€and€thereafter€executed€a€surrender€in€Langstonððs€favor,€we€rejectÐ l¼ Ðthe€Snydersðð€contention€that€their€adoption€petition€was€entitled€to€the€same€consideration€as€theÐ X ¨ Ðpetition€filed€by€Langston.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð D!” ÐÌà  àIn€holding€that€the€Mother€had€the€right€to€choose€the€childððs€adoptive€parent,€subject€to€theÐ #l! Ðtrial€courtððs€later€determination€that€the€proposed€adoption€was€in€the€childððs€best€interests,€we€alsoÐ $X" Ðreject€any€suggestion€that,€inasmuch€as€the€Mother€surrendered€all€parental€rights€to€the€child,€sheÐ ô$D # Ðhad€no€right€to€choose€the€childððs€prospective€adoptive€parent.€€The€adoption€statutes€specificallyÐ à%0!$ Ðpermit€a€biological€parent€to€choose€a€childððs€prospective€adoptive€parent€while€at€the€same€timeÐ Ì&"% Ðsurrendering€all€parental€rights€to€the€child€in€favor€of€the€adoptive€parent.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððððÐ ° Ð36-1-102(45),€36-1-111(c)€(Supp.€1998).€€To€this€end,€the€adoption€statutes€draw€a€distinctionÐ œì Ðbetween€a€voluntary€surrender€of€parental€rights,€such€as€occurred€here,€and€an€involuntaryÐ ˆØ Ðtermination€of€parental€rights.€€In€the€case€of€a€voluntary€surrender,€the€adoption€statutes€permit€theÐ tÄ Ðbiological€parent€to€choose€the€childððs€prospective€adoptive€parent;€however,€the€statutes€confer€noÐ `° Ðsuch€right€on€a€biological€parent€whose€rights€are€involuntarily€terminated.€€ò òòòCompareó óóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ L œ ÐAnn.€ðð€36-1-111€(Supp.€1998),€ò òòòwithó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-113€(Supp.€1998).Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€the€adoption€statutesðð€provisions€authorized€the€procedure€employed€by€the€trialÐ  ` Ðcourt€in€this€case.€€When€faced€with€competing€adoption€petitions,€the€trial€court€properly€allowedÐ ü L  ÐLangston€to€proceed€with€her€petition,€inasmuch€as€only€her€petition€met€the€statutory€custodyÐ è 8  Ðrequirement.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-116(f)(1)€(Supp.€1998).€€As€authorized€by€the€citedÐ Ô$  Ðstatutory€provisions,€the€trial€court€also€allowed€the€Snyders€to€proceed€with€their€petition€to€theÐ À  Ðextent€that€it€sought€to€litigate€the€issue€of€the€best€interests€of€the€child.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ ¬ü  Ð36-1-111(u)(2)€(Supp.€1998).€€Under€the€applicable€statute,€the€Snyders€had€the€burden€of€provingÐ ˜è  Ðby€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€the€proposed€adoption€was€not€in€the€childððs€best€interests.€Ð „Ô  Ðò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-111(v)(4)€(Supp.€1998).€€If€the€Snyders€had€succeeded€in€meeting€thisÐ pÀ Ðburden,€the€Snyders€then€could€have€asked€the€court€for€custody€of€the€child€and€pursued€theirÐ \¬ Ðpetition€for€adoption.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòidó óóó.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àWe€believe€that€this€interpretation€is€consistent€with€the€entire€statutory€scheme,€whichÐ  p Ðattempts€to€strike€a€balance€between€several€potentially€conflicting€interests,€including€the€biologicalÐ  \ Ðparentððs€right€to€choose€a€prospective€adoptive€parent,€the€petitionerððs€right€to€custody€of€the€childÐ øH Ðpending€the€adoption€proceedings,€any€third€partyððs€interest€in€the€childððs€welfare,€and€the€trialÐ ä4 Ðcourtððs€duty€to€protect€the€childððs€best€interests.€€In€light€of€this€statutory€scheme,€we€conclude€thatÐ Ð  Ðthe€trial€court€did€not€err€in€allowing€Langston€to€proceed€with€her€petition€for€adoption€whileÐ ¼  Ðrefusing€to€permit€the€Snyders€to€pursue€their€intervening€adoption€petition.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àWe€also€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€final€decree€of€adoption€wherein€the€court€found€thatÐ €Ð ÐLangstonððs€proposed€adoption€was€in€the€childððs€best€interests.€€As€required€by€Tennesseeððs€adoptionÐ l¼ Ðstatutes,€the€trial€court€found€in€its€final€decree€of€adoption€that€Langston€was€a€fit€person€to€haveÐ X ¨ Ðthe€care€and€custody€of€the€child,€that€Langston€was€financially€able€to€provide€for€the€child,€that€theÐ D!” Ðchild€was€suitable€for€adoption,€that€the€adoption€was€in€the€best€interests€of€the€child,€and€thatÐ 0"€  ÐLangston€had€met€all€of€the€statutory€requirements€for€adopting€the€child.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ #l! Ð36-1-120(a)(10)ð!ð(13),€(d)€(1996).Ð $X" ÐÌà  àOur€review€of€the€trial€courtððs€final€decree€of€adoption€is€governed€by€rule13(d)€of€theÐ à%0!$ ÐTennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòSonetv.€Unknown€Father€of€J.D.H.ó óóó,€797€S.W.2d€1,Ð Ì&"% Ð5€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1990).€€Rule13(d)€requires€this€court,€in€conducting€a€òòò òde€novoó óóó€review€of€theÐ ¸'#& Ðrecord,€to€presume€that€the€trial€courtððs€factual€findings€are€correct,€unless€the€evidence€in€the€recordÐ ¤(ô#' Ðpreponderates€otherwise.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€13(d).€€In€applying€this€standard€of€review,€we€areÐ )à$( Ðmindful€that€ð ðthe€findings€of€the€trial€court€as€to€the€credibility€of€the€witnesses€are€entitled€to€greatÐ |*Ì%) Ðweight.ðð€€ò òòòSonetó óóó,€797€S.W.2d€at€5.Ð h+¸&* Їà  àApplying€the€foregoing€standard€of€review,€we€conclude€that€the€evidence€does€notÐ ° Ðpreponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€proposed€adoption€of€the€child€was€inÐ œì Ðthe€childððs€best€interests.€€This€evidence€showed€that,€when€the€final€adoption€hearing€was€held€inÐ ˆØ ÐFebruary€1999,€the€child€had€been€in€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€custody€for€over€eight€of€the€fourteen€months€of€theÐ tÄ Ðchildððs€life.€€The€child€had€developed€a€strong€emotional€bond€with€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô,€and€he€called€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_ÔÐ `° Ðð ðMama.ðð€€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€was€forty€years€of€age,€had€a€college€degree€in€mathematics,€and€had€worked€forÐ L œ Ðthe€same€employer€for€over€twenty€years.€€She€earned€in€excess€of€$70,000€per€year€and€wasÐ 8 ˆ Ðfinancially€able€to€provide€for€the€child.€€While€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€was€at€work,€a€nanny€took€care€of€the€child.€Ð $ t ÐAccording€to€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô,€the€nanny€and€the€child€got€along€well,€and€they€loved€each€other.€€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_ÔÐ  ` Ðhad€completed€the€stateððs€training€courses€for€adoptive€parents,€and€Anne€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ô,€the€licensedÐ ü L  Ðclinical€social€worker€who€performed€the€home€study€on€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€home,€gave€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€aÐ è 8  Ðfavorable€recommendation.€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àIn€contending€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€adoption€was€in€the€childððsÐ ¬ü  Ðbest€interests,€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€focus€primarily€on€two€factors:€€(1)the€nontraditional€structure€ofÐ ˜è  ÐÔ_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€home,€and€(2)Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€credibility€problems€as€evidenced€by€her€failure€to€divulgeÐ „Ô  Ðcertain€information€during€a€July€1998€deposition.€€Regarding€the€first€factor,€the€evidence€showedÐ pÀ Ðthat€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€had€resided€with€the€same€woman€for€over€seven€years.€€At€the€time€of€trial,€the€twoÐ \¬ Ðwomen€lived€together€in€a€house€that€they€owned€jointly.€€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€testified€that€she€and€herÐ H˜ Ðroommate€were€ð ðclose€committed€friendsðð€and€that€they€intended€ð ðto€live€together€forever.ðð€Ð 4„ ÐÔ_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€and€her€roommate€acknowledged€that€they€had€a€prior€sexual€relationship,€but€theÐ  p Ðroommate€testified€that,€since€the€child€came€into€the€home,€this€sexual€relationship€had€ceased€andÐ  \ Ðthey€were€ð ðevaluating€that€relationship.ðð€€As€the€result€of€artificial€insemination,€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_ÔððsÐ øH Ðroommate€gave€birth€to€a€son€in€December€1998.€€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô,€her€roommate,€the€roommateððs€infantÐ ä4 Ðson,€and€the€child€all€lived€together€in€a€four„bedroom,€two„bathroom€house€where€each€had€his€orÐ Ð  Ðher€own€bedroom.€€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àAs€for€the€issue€of€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€credibility,€the€evidence€showed€that,€when€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€wasÐ ”ä Ðasked€during€a€July€1998€deposition€where€she€lived,€she€testified€that€she€lived€in€a€house€onÐ €Ð ÐTunbridge€Place€and€that€the€house€was€titled€in€her€name.€€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€did€not€divulge,€however,€thatÐ l¼ Ðshe€had€sold€the€house€just€days€prior€to€her€deposition€and€that€she€soon€would€be€moving€to€a€newÐ X ¨ Ðhome€that€she€had€purchased€jointly€with€her€roommate.€€During€the€July€1998€deposition,€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_ÔÐ D!” Ðalso€did€not€fully€disclose€the€nature€of€her€relationship€with€her€roommate,€and€she€did€not€divulgeÐ 0"€  Ðthat€she€was€considering€hiring€a€new€nanny€for€the€child.€€Ð #l! ÐÌà  àDespite€these€arguably€negative€factors,€we€decline€to€second„guess€the€trial€courtððs€findingÐ ô$D # Ðthat€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€proposed€adoption€was€in€the€childððs€best€interests.€€Many€of€the€asserted€credibilityÐ à%0!$ Ðproblems€with€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€testimony€stemmed,€not€from€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€affirmative€misrepresentations,Ð Ì&"% Ðbut€from€her€failure€to€voluntarily€disclose€certain€information.€€Although€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ôðð€counselÐ ¸'#& Ðattempted€to€impeach€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€by€referencing€her€July€1998€deposition€testimony,€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_ÔÐ ¤(ô#' Ðexplained,€apparently€to€the€trial€courtððs€satisfaction,€that€she€accurately€identified€her€place€ofÐ )à$( Ðresidence,€the€identity€of€her€roommate,€and€the€identity€of€the€childððs€nanny€when€she€was€askedÐ |*Ì%) Ðthese€questions€during€the€deposition.€€Significantly,€the€record€contains€no€evidence€that€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_ÔÐ h+¸&* Ðattempted€to€conceal€these€details€from€Anne€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ô,€the€licensed€clinical€social€worker€whoÐ ° Ðperformed€the€home€study.€€To€the€contrary,€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ô€testified€that€she€was€fully€aware€ofÐ œì ÐÔ_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€living€arrangements€and€the€nature€of€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€relationship€with€her€longtimeÐ ˆØ Ðroommate.€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àAs€for€the€nontraditional€structure€of€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€home,€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ôðð€counsel€was€permittedÐ L œ Ðto€fully€explore€the€details€of€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€living€arrangements€in€his€cross„examination€of€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô,Ð 8 ˆ ÐÔ_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€roommate,€and€Anne€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ô.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€trial€court€specifically€considered€this€evidence,Ð $ t Ðbut€ultimately€the€court€found€that€the€proposed€adoption€was€in€the€childððs€best€interests.€€We€agreeÐ  ` Ðthat,€just€as€a€parentððs€lifestyle€is€a€factor€for€the€trial€court€to€consider€in€making€a€custody€decision,Ð ü L  Ðò òòòseeó óóó€ò òòòIn€re€Parsonsó óóó,€914€S.W.2d€889,€894€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1995),€the€lifestyle€of€a€proposed€adoptiveÐ è 8  Ðparent€is€certainly€a€factor€that€the€trial€court€should€consider€in€determining€whether€a€proposedÐ Ô$  Ðadoption€is€in€a€childððs€best€interests,€ò òòòseeó óóó€ò òòòHalev.€Breweró óóó,€No.€03A01„9301„CV„00054,€1993€WLÐ À  Ð328061,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Aug.18,€1993)€(òòò òno€perm.€app.€filedó óóó).€€By€itself,€however,€this€factorÐ ¬ü  Ðdoes€not€control€the€outcome€of€custody€or€adoption€decisions,€particularly€absent€evidence€of€itsÐ ˜è  Ðeffects€on€the€child.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòParsonsó óóó,€914€S.W.2d€at€894.Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àAfter€reviewing€the€entire€record€in€this€case,€and€particularly€the€evidence€presented€at€theÐ \¬ Ðfinal€adoption€hearing,€we€decline€to€disturb€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€proposedÐ H˜ Ðadoption€was€in€the€childððs€best€interests.€€Although€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€questioned€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€livingÐ 4„ Ðarrangements€and€her€ability€to€raise€a€male€child€in€that€environment,€the€record€contains€littleÐ  p Ðevidence€as€to€what,€if€any,€effects€this€factor€might€have€on€the€child.€€The€evidence€showed€thatÐ  \ ÐÔ_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€and€her€roommate€maintained€separate€bedrooms€and€had€ceased€their€sexual€relationshipÐ øH Ðsince€the€child€came€into€the€home.€€They€did€not€rule€out€the€possibility€of€resuming€their€sexualÐ ä4 Ðrelationship€at€some€future€date,€but€their€present€focus€was€on€parenting€their€respective€children.€Ð Ð  ÐÔ_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€acknowledged€the€childððs€need€for€interaction€with€adult€males,€and€she€expressed€herÐ ¼  Ðcommitment€to€providing€opportunities€for€such€interaction.€€Anne€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ô€opined€that€suchÐ ¨ø Ðinteraction€was€a€concern€any€time€a€single€parent€undertook€to€raise€a€child,€regardless€of€theÐ ”ä Ðparentððs€sexual€orientation.€€Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€also€contend€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€accepting€the€home€study€reportÐ X ¨ Ðprepared€by€Anne€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ô€and€in€approving€her€recommendation€that€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€was€fit€to€adoptÐ D!” Ðthe€child.€€The€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€contend€that€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ôððs€home€study€report€failed€to€comply€with€the€orderÐ 0"€  Ðof€reference€appointing€her€because€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ô€failed€to€investigate€and€report€all€of€theÐ #l! Ðcircumstances€and€conditions€which€had€a€bearing€on€the€adoption€and€of€which€the€trial€courtÐ $X" Ðshould€have€been€apprised.€€In€particular,€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€criticize€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ôððs€report€because€it€failedÐ ô$D # Ðto€divulge€the€full€extent€and€nature€of€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€relationship€with€her€roommate.€€The€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€alsoÐ à%0!$ Ðcriticize€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ôððs€report€and€recommendation€because,€in€terms€of€parental€fitness,€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_ÔÐ Ì&"% Ðrated€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€a€ð ðtenðð€on€a€scale€of€one€to€ten,€and€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ô€testified€that€her€assessment€ofÐ ° ÐÔ_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€fitness€to€adopt€the€child€was€not€affected€by€the€sexual€nature€of€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ôððs€relationshipÐ œì Ðwith€her€roommate.€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àContrary€to€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ôðð€contention,€we€conclude€that€the€trial€court€was€not€required€toÐ `° Ðreject€Anne€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ôððs€home€study€report€and€adoption€recommendation.€€The€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ôðð€objectionsÐ L œ Ðon€appeal€relate,€not€to€the€admissibility€of€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ôððs€report€and€recommendation,€but€to€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðweight€that€should€have€been€given€this€evidence.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòÔ_ÔCatesÔ_Ôv.€Better„Ô_ÔBiltÔ_Ô€Aluminum€Prods.€Co.óóó ó,Ð $ t Ð607€S.W.2d€476,€478€(Tenn.€1980);€ò òòòEstate€of€Ô_ÔJesseeÔ_Ôv.€Whiteó óóó,€633€S.W.2d€767,€769€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð  ` Ð1982);€ò òòòsee€alsoó óóó€ò òòòPlunkv.€Illinois€Cent.€R.R.ó óóó,€No.€02A01„9707„CV„00167,€1998€WL€227772,€at€*17Ð ü L  Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€May8,€1998),€ò òòòperm.€app.€deniedó óóó€(Tenn.€Oct.19,€1998)€(indicating€that€weaknessesÐ è 8  Ðin€expertððs€opinion€bear€on€weight€of€evidence€rather€than€its€admissibility).€€On€cross„examination,Ð Ô$  Ðthe€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ôðð€counsel€had€ample€opportunity€to€impeach€Ô_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ô€regarding€the€contents€of€herÐ À  Ðreport€and€the€bases€for€her€recommendation.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòPlunkó óóó,€1998€WL€227772,€at€*17;€ò òòòÔ_ÔBoyeÔ_Ôv.€Mooreó óóó,Ð ¬ü  ÐNo.€03A01„9812„CV„00424,€1999€WL€1068699,€at€*8€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Nov.24,€1999)€(òòò òno€perm.Ð ˜è  Ðapp.€filedó óóó).€€As€the€trier€of€fact,€the€trial€court€was€in€the€best€position€to€adjudge€the€credibility€ofÐ „Ô  ÐÔ_ÔMcGinnisÔ_Ôððs€testimony€and€to€determine€the€weight€to€give€her€report€and€recommendation.€€ò òòòSeeó óóóÐ pÀ Ðò òòòWilliamsv.€Stewardó óóó,€No.€02A01„9712„CV„00311,€1998€WL€408795,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€July22,Ð \¬ Ð1998)€(ò òòòno€perm.€app.€filedó óóó);€ò òòòYorkv.€Yorkó óóó,€No.€01A01„9104„CV„00131,€1992€WL€181710,€at€*4Ð H˜ Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€July31,€1992)€(òòò òno€perm.€app.€filedó óóó).Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àAs€previously€stated,€our€review€of€this€matter€is€òòò òde€novoóóó ó€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,Ð  \ Ðaccompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact,€unless€theÐ øH Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Rule€13(d)€Tenn.€Rule€App.€P.€€This€court€is€limitedÐ ä4 Ðto€the€facts€in€the€record€before€us.€€We€are€unable€to€find€any€evidence€in€this€record€that€the€rearingÐ Ð  Ðof€this€child€by€Ms.€Ô_ÔLangstonÔ_Ô€will€have€an€adverse€effect€on€the€child.€€We€do€not€feel€that€this€courtÐ ¼  Ðcan€take€judicial€notice€of€this.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àWe€further€conclude€that€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ôðð€constitutional€attacks€on€the€adoption€statutes€do€notÐ €Ð Ðprovide€a€basis€for€reversing€the€final€decree€of€adoption.€€The€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€first€complain€that€theÐ l¼ Ðadoption€statutes€are€unconstitutional€because€they€fail€to€provide€a€childððs€biological€relatives€withÐ X ¨ Ðnotice€of€the€childððs€impending€adoption.€€In€fact,€the€adoption€statutes€contain€a€specific€provisionÐ D!” Ðdispensing€with€such€notice.€€The€challenged€provision€states€thatÐ 0"€  ÐÌà8  àà ` à[Ô_Ôo]therÔ_Ô€biological€or€legal€relatives€of€the€child€or€the€adult€are€not€necessaryÐ $X" Ðparties€to€the€proceeding€and€shall€not€be€entitled€to€notice€of€the€adoptionÐ ô$D # Ðproceedings€unless€they€are€legal€guardians€as€defined€in€ðð36-1-102€or€legalÐ à%0!$ Ðcustodians€of€the€person€of€the€child€or€adult€at€the€time€the€petition€is€filed.ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36-1-117(d)(1)€(Supp.€1998).€€The€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€also€complain€that€the€adoptionÐ ¤(ô#' Ðstatutes€are€unconstitutional€because€they€fail€to€contain€a€provision€requiring€the€appointment€of€aÐ )à$( Ðguardian€ò òòòad€litemó óóó€to€represent€the€childððs€best€interests€in€an€adoption€proceeding.€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àThe€law€is€well„established€that€ð ð[a]€person€has€no€standing€to€contest€the€constitutionalityÐ ° Ðof€a€statutory€provision€unless€the€provision€he€claims€to€be€deficient€has€been€used€to€deprive€himÐ œì Ðof€his€rights.ðð€€ò òòòStatev.€Johnsonó óóó,€762€S.W.2d€110,€118€(Tenn.€1988),€òòò òcert.€deniedó óóó,€489€U.S.€1091Ð ˆØ Ð(1989);€ò òòòStatev.€Ô_ÔVanzantÔ_Ôó óóó,€659€S.W.2d€816,€819€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1983);€ò òòòaccordó óóó€ò òòòStatev.€Perryó óóó,€13Ð tÄ ÐS.W.3d€724,€741€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€1999);€ò òòòStatev.€Ô_ÔPurkeyÔ_Ôó óóó,€689€S.W.2d€196,€201€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.Ð `° Ð1984).€€In€accordance€with€this€principle,€the€courts€of€this€state€ð ðhave€refused€to€permit€anÐ L œ Ðindividual€to€question€the€constitutionality€of€a€statute€in€the€absence€of€a€showing€that€he€or€she€hasÐ 8 ˆ Ðbeen€adversely€affected€by€it.ðð€€ò òòòIn€re€Adoption€of€Tayloró óóó,€678€S.W.2d€69,€73€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).Ð $ t ÐÌà  àIn€ò òòòÔ_ÔInÔ_Ô€re€Adoption€of€Tayloró óóó,€for€example,€we€held€that€an€adoptive€childððs€grandparentsÐ ü L  Ðlacked€standing€to€challenge€the€constitutionality€of€Tennesseeððs€adoption€statutes€because€theÐ è 8  Ðgrandparents€failed€to€demonstrate€that€their€rights€or€interests€had€been€adversely€affected€by€theÐ Ô$  Ðchallenged€provisions.€€ò òòòTayloró óóó,€678€S.W.2d€at€73.€€In€ò òòòScottv.€Pulleyóóó ó,€705€S.W.2d€666,€670„71Ð À  Ð(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1985),€we€held€that€an€adoptive€childððs€biological€mother€lacked€standing€toÐ ¬ü  Ðchallenge€the€constitutionality€of€a€provision€that€established€a€ninety„day€period€for€revokingÐ ˜è  Ðsurrenders.€€Inasmuch€as€the€biological€mother€waited€almost€eleven€months€to€attempt€to€revokeÐ „Ô  Ðher€surrender,€we€reasoned€that€she€had€not€been€adversely€affected€by€the€statuteððs€ninety„dayÐ pÀ Ðlimitation€period.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòScottó óóó,€705€S.W.2d€at€671.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àWe€conclude€that€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€lacked€standing€to€raise€the€foregoing€constitutional€challenges.€Ð 4„ ÐThe€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€had€notice€of€the€childððs€adoption€proceedings,€and€they€were€permitted€to€participateÐ  p Ðin€the€proceedings€for€the€purpose€of€litigating€the€childððs€best€interests.€€Under€these€circumstances,Ð  \ Ðthe€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€cannot€claim€that€either€they€or€the€child€were€adversely€affected€by€the€challengedÐ øH Ðprovision€dispensing€with€notice€to€the€childððs€biological€relatives.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àWe€similarly€reject€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ôðð€contention€that€the€adoption€statutes€are€constitutionallyÐ ¼  Ðinfirm€because€they€fail€to€contain€a€provision€requiring€the€appointment€of€a€guardian€ò òòòad€litemóóó ó€inÐ ¨ø Ðadoption€proceedings.€€Although€the€adoption€statutes€do€not€contain€such€a€requirement,€the€statutesÐ ”ä Ðalso€do€not€prohibit€the€appointment€of€a€guardian€ò òòòad€litemó óóó€in€adoption€proceedings.€€Inasmuch€asÐ €Ð Ðthe€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€did€not€ask€the€trial€court€to€appoint€a€guardian€ò òòòad€litemó óóó€for€the€child,€and€inasmuch€asÐ l¼ Ðthe€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€were€permitted€to€intervene€in€the€adoption€proceedings€for€the€purpose€of€litigating€theÐ X ¨ Ðchildððs€best€interests,€we€fail€to€see€how€they€or€the€child€were€prejudiced€by€the€absence€of€such€aÐ D!” Ðstatutory€requirement.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àThe€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€additionally€challenge€the€adoption€statutes€on€equal€protection€grounds,Ð $X" Ðcontending€that€the€statutes€violate€equal€protection€principles€because€they€fail€to€contain€provisionsÐ ô$D # Ðrequiring€the€trial€court€to€consider€placing€a€child€with€relatives€before€placing€the€child€with€non„Ð à%0!$ Ðrelatives.€€In€support€of€this€argument,€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€cite€Tennesseeððs€guardianship€statutes,€whichÐ Ì&"% Ðdirect€the€trial€court,€in€appointing€a€guardian€for€a€child,€to€consider€the€following€persons€in€theÐ ¸'#& Ðorder€listed:Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà8  àà ` à(1)à ¸ àThe€parent€or€parents€of€the€minor;Ð|*Ì%)Ð Ð  ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà8  àà ` à(2)à ¸ àThe€person€or€persons€designated€by€the€parent€or€parents€in€a€will€orÐ ° Ðother€written€document;ÐœìÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(3)à ¸ àAdult€siblings€of€the€minor;ÐtÄÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(4)à ¸ àClosest€relative(s)€of€the€minor;€andÐL œÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(5)à ¸ àOther€person(s).Ð$ tÐ Ð  ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€34-12-103€(1996).€€The€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€also€cite€this€stateððs€foster€care€statutes,€whichÐ ü L  Ðrequire€that,€for€each€child€in€foster€care,€a€plan€be€prepared€that€includes€one€of€the€following€goals:Ð è 8  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(A)à ¸ àReturn€of€the€child€to€parent;ÐÀ Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(B)à ¸ àPlacement€of€the€child€with€relatives€of€the€child;Иè Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(C)à ¸ àAdoption,...;€ÐpÀÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(D)à ¸ àPermanent€foster€care;€andÐH˜Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà ` à(E)à ¸ àEmancipation€by€marriage,€court€order€or€reaching€the€age€of€Ô& ° Ômajority.Ð pÐ Ð  ÐÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37-2-403(a)(1)€(Supp.€1998).€€Ô'° ì ÔÐ øH ÐÓÓà  àBoth€the€United€States€Constitution€and€the€Tennessee€Constitution€contain€provisionsÐ Ð  Ðguaranteeing€to€citizens€the€equal€protection€of€the€laws.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòBrownv.€Campbell€County€Bd.€ofÐ ¼  ÐEduc.ó óóó,€915€S.W.2d€407,€412€(Tenn.€1995)€(citing€U.S.€Const.€amend.€XIV;€Tenn.€Const.€art.I,€ðð8,Ð ¨ø Ðart.€XI,€ðð8),€ò òòòcert.€deniedó óóó,€517€U.S.€1222€(1996).€€These€constitutional€provisions€ð ðconfer€essentiallyÐ ”ä Ðthe€same€protection€upon€the€individuals€subject€to€those€provisionsðð€by€guaranteeing€that€ð ðallÐ €Ð Ðpersons€similarly€circumstanced€shall€be€treated€alike.ðð€€ò òòòTennessee€Small€Sch.€Sys.v.€McWherteró óóó,Ð l¼ Ð851€S.W.2d€139,€152„53€(Tenn.€1993)€(quoting€ò òòòF.S.€Royster€Guano€Co.v.€Virginiaó óóó,€253€U.S.€412,Ð X ¨ Ð415€(1920)).Ð D!” ÐÌà  àBecause€of€the€similarities€between€the€federal€and€state€equal€protection€provisions,Ð #l! ÐÌà8  à[Ô_Ôw]henÔ_Ô€interpreting€Article€XI,€Section8€[of€the€Tennessee€Constitution],€the€courtsÐ ô$D # Ðof€this€state€utilize€the€same€framework€developed€by€the€United€States€SupremeÐ à%0!$ ÐCourt€for€analyzing€equal€protection€claims€brought€under€the€[Fourteenth]Ð Ì&"% ÐAmendment€to€the€federal€constitution....€€Under€this€framework,€a€legislativeÐ ¸'#& Ðclassification€is€subject€to€strict€scrutiny€when€it€interferes€with€a€fundamental€rightÐ ¤(ô#' Ðor€operates€to€the€[disadvantage]€of€a€suspect€class€of€persons....€€If,€however,€aÐ )à$( Ðlegislative€classification€does€not€interfere€with€a€fundamental€right€or€adverselyÐ |*Ì%) Ðaffect€a€suspect€class€of€persons,€then€the€classification€is€subject€to€[rational]€basisÐ h+¸&* Ðscrutiny....€€Under€rational€basis€scrutiny,€a€legislative€classification€will€be€upheldÐ ° Ðif€a€reasonable€basis€can€be€found€for€the€classification€or€if€any€set€of€facts€mayÐ œì Ðreasonably€be€conceived€to€justify€it.ЈØÐ Ð  ÐÌò òòòÔ_ÔCaudillÔ_Ôv.€Foleyóóó ó,€No.€01A01„9903„CH„00187,€1999€WL€976597,€at€*6€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€Oct.28,Ð `° Ð1999),€ò òòòperm.€app.€deniedó óóó€(Tenn.€Apr.17,€2000)€(citations€omitted).Ð L œ ÐÌà  àIn€the€present€case,€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€contend€that€this€stateððs€laws€treat€children€who€are€theÐ $ t Ðsubject€of€adoption€proceedings€differently€than€children€who€are€the€subject€of€guardianship€orÐ  ` Ðfoster€care€proceedings.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Inasmuch€as€the€challenged€classification€does€not€disturb€a€fundamentalÐ ü L  Ðright€or€adversely€affect€a€suspect€class€of€persons,€we€must€uphold€the€classification€if€anyÐ è 8  Ðreasonable€basis€for€it€exists.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòÔ_ÔCaudillÔ_Ôó óóó,€1999€WL€976597,€at€*6.€€In€this€regard,€the€adoptionÐ Ô$  Ðstatutes€themselves€provide€a€reasonable€basis€for€the€legislatureððs€disparate€treatment€of€childrenÐ À  Ðinvolved€in€adoption€proceedings.€€As€we€previously€discussed,€the€adoption€statutes€recognize€theÐ ¬ü  Ðright€of€a€childððs€biological€parent€to€choose€the€childððs€adoptive€parent,€subject€to€the€trial€courtððsÐ ˜è  Ðdetermination€that€the€proposed€adoption€is€in€the€childððs€best€interests.׃ö×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððððÐ „Ô  Ð36-1-102(45),€36-1-111(c),€36-1-116(b)(9),€36-1-120(a)(13)€(1996€&€Supp.€1998).€€In€cases€whereÐ pÀ Ða€trial€court€is€presented€with€a€valid€surrender€or€parental€consent,€requiring€the€court€first€toÐ \¬ Ðconsider€placing€the€child€with€biological€relatives€would€be€illogical€because€it€would€conflict€withÐ H˜ Ðthe€biological€parentððs€right€to€make€the€initial€choice€of€an€adoptive€parent.€€Moreover,€we€observeÐ 4„ Ðthat,€even€in€the€context€of€the€guardianship€statutes€cited€by€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô,€if€no€parent€is€available,Ð  p Ðthe€court€is€required€to€consider€first€the€guardian€designated€by€the€absent€parent.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ  \ ÐAnn.€ðð€34-12-103€(1996).€€In€short,€we€do€not€believe€that€the€cited€statutory€provisions€affordÐ øH Ðdifferent€treatment€to€similarly€situated€persons.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àFinally,€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€mount€a€general€constitutional€attack€on€Tennesseeððs€adoption€statutes.€Ð ¼  ÐAlthough€some€of€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ôðð€arguments€are€not€clearly€articulated,€their€primary€contentionÐ ¨ø Ðappears€to€be€that€the€adoption€statutes€do€not€achieve€their€goal€of€protecting€the€childððs€bestÐ ”ä Ðinterests€because€they€permit€the€biological€parent€to€choose€the€childððs€prospective€adoptive€parentÐ €Ð Ðto€the€exclusion€of€the€childððs€other€biological€relatives.€€As€pointed€out€by€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô,€in€enactingÐ l¼ Ðthe€adoption€statutes,€the€legislature€indicated€that€the€childððs€best€interests€were€entitled€toÐ X ¨ Ðconstitutional€protection€and€that€any€conflict€between€the€childððs€interests€and€those€of€an€adultÐ D!” Ðshould€ð ðalways€be€resolved€to€favor€the€rights€and€the€best€interests€of€the€child.ðð€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€Tenn.€CodeÐ ° ÐAnn.€ðð€36-1-101(d)€(1996).Ð œì ÐÌà  àWe€conclude€that€this€argument€is€without€merit.€€When€faced€with€such€a€constitutionalÐ tÄ Ðassault€on€a€statute,€this€court€must€indulge€every€presumption€and€resolve€every€doubt€in€favor€ofÐ `° Ðthe€constitutionality€of€the€legislative€enactment.€€ò òòòSeeó óóó€ò òòòRiggsv.€Ô_ÔBursonÔ_Ôó óóó,€941€S.W.2d€44,€51€(Tenn.),Ð L œ Ðò òòòcert.€deniedóóó ó,€522€U.S.€982€(1997);€ò òòòVogelv.€Wells€Fargo€Guard€Ô_ÔServsÔ_Ô.ó óóó,€937€S.W.2d€856,€858€(Tenn.Ð 8 ˆ Ð1996).€€The€party€challenging€the€constitutionality€of€a€statute€ð ðbears€a€heavy€burden€of€overcomingÐ $ t Ðthat€presumption.ðð€€ò òòòHelmsv.€Tennessee€Ô_ÔDepððtÔ_Ô€of€Safetyó óóó,€987€S.W.2d€545,€550€(Tenn.€1999).Ð  ` ÐÌà  àIn€our€view,€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€have€failed€to€meet€their€burden€of€demonstrating€that€TennesseeððsÐ è 8  Ðadoption€statutes€are€unconstitutional.€€Although€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€ably€argue€that,€in€some€circumstances,Ð Ô$  Ðthe€adoption€statutes€do€not€serve€the€best€interests€of€adoptive€children,€we€believe€that€many€ofÐ À  Ðtheir€arguments€do€not€raise€constitutional€issues€but,€rather,€are€complaints€that€would€be€moreÐ ¬ü  Ðappropriately€addressed€to€the€legislature€responsible€for€enacting€and€revising€the€statutes.€Ð ˜è  ÐMoreover,€although€the€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€criticize€the€adoption€statutes€for€permitting€a€biological€parent€toÐ „Ô  Ðdesignate€his€or€her€childððs€prospective€adoptive€parent,€we€reiterate€that€this€choice€is€always€subjectÐ pÀ Ðto€the€trial€courtððs€ultimate€determination€that€the€proposed€adoption€is€in€the€childððs€best€interests.€Ð \¬ ÐThe€Ô_ÔSnydersÔ_Ô€remain€firm€in€their€conviction€that€their€grandsonððs€best€interests€were€not€served€inÐ H˜ Ðthese€adoption€proceedings;€however,€such€a€result€does€not€mean€that€the€adoption€statutesÐ 4„ Ðthemselves€are€constitutionally€defective.Ð  p Ðà  àÌà  àThe€trial€courtððs€final€decree€of€adoption€is€affirmed,€and€this€cause€is€remanded€for€furtherÐ øH Ðproceedings€consistent€with€this€opinion.€€Costs€of€this€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€appellants,€CindyG.Ð ä4 ÐSnyder€and€WolfgangW.€Snyder,€and€their€surety,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ð Ð  ÐÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð l¼ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€R.€FARMER,€JUDGE