associates, is missing here. Conclusion Troxel made it clear that when a forum has been created for a court to consider grandparent visitation, the judge must presume that a fit parent acts in the best interests of his or her children. “So long as a parent adequately cares for his or her children (i.e., is fit), there will normally be no reason for the state to inject itself into the private realm of the family to further question the ability of that parent to make the best decisions concerning the rearing of that parent’s children.” Troxel, 530 U.S. at 68-69, 120 S.Ct. at 2061. This presumption is not simply applicable to joint decisions of fit married parents but applies to the decisions of all fit parents. See Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 92 S.Ct. 1208, 31 L.Ed.2d 551 (1972) (<HOLDING>). It is parental fitness, not mere marital
holding that the state may not interfere with an unwed fathers custody rights absent proof of unfitness holding unconstitutional a statute providing for children to be declared dependent and removed from their unwed fathers custody based on the presumption that unwed fathers are unfit parents holding due process was violated by the automatic rejection of an unwed fathers custodial relationship without granting the father opportunity to present evidence regarding his fitness as a parent recognizing that a court is without jurisdiction to issue an injunction which would interfere with the rights of those who are not parties to the action holding that if an unwed father promptly comes forward and demonstrates a full commitment to his parental responsibilities  emotional financial and otherwise  his federal constitutional right to due process prohibits the termination of his parental relationship absent a showing of his unfitness as a parent