1. With the familial landscape having evolved over the last thirty years, neither parent fitting assumed roles and a bond formed between father and child as a case in point, can the "biology-plus" standard still be considered constitutional when it can no longer be justly applied?

2. Ultimately having a negative impact on the children, does it serve the ends of justice if fundamental rights afforded to parents by the U.S. Constitution are unethically contemned when contesting adoption?

3. As federal laws provide encompassing standards with which state adoption laws comply, any action based on the implemented statute, which a broader definition of support is to be affixed, requires that all relevant surrounding circumstances be considered. Once accurately interpreted, is there clear and convincing evidence that Father did not provide support to Mother for the last six months of pregnancy?

Can the 'biology-plus' standard still be considered constitutional when it can no longer be justly applied?