Here are some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on adoption.

Do I tell my dad?

(12 Posts)
Simplesimon1 Fri 27-May-16 07:41:30

My sister has found my half brother, who was adopted as a baby, when my brother and I were very young. My sister, who I don't have a great relationship with, has no contact with my Dad (who fathered my adopted half brother). My half brother, who is now 55, apparently, isn't interested in meeting my Dad but is happy to meet me (not sure if that's true - or just what my sister says).

Whether I meet him or not ..... Do I tell my Dad? Does he have a right to know that my sister has found his other child?

Hope that makes sense!

ZigZagIntoTheBlue Fri 27-May-16 07:53:16

It depends on a lot, why was he adopted out, is there a reason your sister doesn't talk to him at all. Might be best to meet him and gauge whether to mention it afterwards depending on what he's like. If he wanted to meet your dad then lambast him got being put up for adoption you'd probably not want to facilitate that? Best of luck!

tybalt22 Fri 27-May-16 10:35:10

Not totally connected but as a teen I found out my father of 16 years was not my bio father. I sought out my bio father through curiosity but never wanted my dad to get hurt, I waited until we had met and then told my dad. I think waiting to see if there is really anything to say is better

Kr1stina Sun 29-May-16 09:18:26

When your dad relinquished his son for adoption , he gave up any rights in regards to him . If his biological son ( and your half brother ) had decided not to meet him then it's his choice and you would be wrong to try to interfere . I think that at 55 he's old enough to know his own mind !

Obviously if you don't want to meet your brother under the circumstances then that's your choice .

I hope it works out well for you and your siblings

LettingAgentNightmare Tue 07-Jun-16 07:56:33

Kristina, do you really think the Dad 'gave up his rights'? It was 55 years ago, if the parents weren't married the Father wouldn't have had any rights.

I think saying, essentially, 'screw him, he made his choice' is really cruel. This is still his child and we don't actually know the reasons behind the adoption.

Kr1stina Tue 07-Jun-16 17:00:30

Even 55 years ago , he would have had the opertunity to go along and register the birth with his partner. He would have had the right to apply for the courts for parental rights or to ask SS if he could raise the child rather than his being placed for adoption .

He didn't do any of that .

When the child was 16 he had the choice to leave his details for the child to find .

As far as we know, he didnt do that either .

The law of the land as well as natural law, says that choices have consequences . You don't get to walk away from your child for 55 YEARS!!!!! Then get to assert your fictional rights.

It's not " still his child" , the child was adopted, this man has no legal rights at all in this regard . Whatever the reason for the adoption, this doesn't change any of this .

Any moral right that pertains here is with the adoptee, HE is is person who has the choices now. He didn't ask to be born or to be placed for adoption - that was the choice of the couple concerned .

And he has stated that he does NOT want contact .

LettingAgentNightmare Sun 12-Jun-16 17:47:47

Are you really that naive or just being obtuse?

An unmarried Father has no rights to register the birth alone and must be told by the Mother when it is if he is to go along.

You have no idea what happened and you are judging him anyway. 55 years ago things were very different for unmarried parents, especially the Fathers. You don't know he didn't leave his details to be passed on and the son decided not to make contact with him.

Kr1stina Mon 13-Jun-16 00:20:25

Even 55 years ago , he would have had the opportunity to go along and register the birth with his partner. He would have had the right to apply for the courts for parental rights or to ask SS if he could raise the child rather than his being placed for adoption

* as far as we know he didnt do that either*

I may be naive. But at least I'm not rude . And I can read .

Why don't you disagree with the content of my posts rather than name call?

Seems like the only person judging here is you .

LettingAgentNightmare Mon 13-Jun-16 06:52:11

IF THE MOTHER TOLD HIM.

You don't even know that he knew there was a baby until after he was adopted.

If the Mother didn't tell him she was going to register the baby, how exactly could he have gone. His name wouldn't have been put on the certificate and he would have had no rights. You keep calling her his 'partner', but you have no idea they were in a relationship or if it was ONS and she didn't even tell him she was pregnant.

55 years ago, how many unmarried Fathers were given full custody of new born babies?

You have decided he abandoned his child when you have no idea what happened. You are being cruel for no reason, as you don't know the man or his child at all.

LettingAgentNightmare Mon 13-Jun-16 06:54:28

And also, you don't know he didn't apply to keep the child. Unless you were actually there? or maybe you have magical powers?

Don't present things as facts that you don't know about. It just makes you look silly.

Kr1stina Mon 13-Jun-16 14:14:39

Please tell me where I said

You have decided he abandoned his child when you have no idea what happened. You are being cruel for no reason, as you don't know the man or his child at all?

Well you are wrong because I DO know the man . And there is no child at all here as the person concerned is in fact 55 years old .

And do in fact have magical powers.

So who looks silly now then?

I note that you are arguing for the rights of a man who may have had a ONS 55 years during which he unknowingly inpregnated a woman ( your own argument ) and AGAINST the rights of a legally competent man of 55 who had decided, knowing all the facts , that he doesn't want to see his biological father .

Interesting .

The law has already decided where the balance of rights lie in situations like this. I wonder what your agenda is.

LettingAgentNightmare Mon 13-Jun-16 18:43:20

'The law of the land as well as natural law, says that choices have consequences . You don't get to walk away from your child for 55 YEARS!!!!! Then get to assert your fictional rights.'

You say he walked away so has no rights. I say he created (partially) this other person so should at least have the right to know he is still alive. Even if the son doesn't want to meet him.

Adoption doesn't sever the lies of biology.

I don't believe for a second you just happen to know OP or her brother.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now