Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you have any legal concerns we suggest you consult a solicitor.
Paternity test - can the mother be compelled to allow DNA test?(111 Posts)
Just what the title says really.
Have a friend with a young baby. Boyfriend wanted nothing to do with my friend once he found out she was pregnant. Claimed he didn't think the baby was his.
He is not on the birth certificate, has never met the baby (doesn't even know the name), but has now made contact saying he wants parental responsibility.
The guy is violent, with mh problems, and my friend wants nothing to do with him, let alone letting him access to the baby.
My question is, can she be forced to submit the baby to a paternity test?
You should start your own thread as this is a zombie thread.
However Yes he can apply to the courts for a DNA test and it is a criminal offence to list someone as the father when they're not.
My brother met a girl he did not know at all, she has 2 children already 1 an 2 year old their father has a regular involvement in them he is on their birth cert of both, after only 8 weeks she pregnant again claims its my brothers, she keeps asking my brother for money all the time, which he keeps giving and buying what ever she asks for and needs,yet refuses to have a DNA and his name on the birth cert or for him to be at the birth or even involved in the future with the baby, can my brother force her and baby when born to a DNA ? the involvement is over but my brother just wants to stand up and be counted as a decent person, there is a very good chance the baby is not his
This thread is 4 years old. I expect this is long since resolved.
Surely there is no point in the court ordering a paternity test.
If he wants to prove he is the father there is no point because she has already said he is at the start.
If he wants to prove that he is not the father, there is no point because he is not being asked for anything.
If he wants to take it to court out of idle curiosity, he is just wasting court time which will make him look what he is..............
Can she not use the CMS as leverage? Get her solicitor to write a very simple letter saying that she will welcome a DNA test and, of course, if the claimant is determined to be the father, she will obviously insist on her legal right to pursue him for maintenance until the child is 18. It might just scare him off enough for him to leave well alone.
David Blunkett when a Minnister in the UK changed English law so that even lovers could force a DNA test on a married couple (on the mother) - and then he used it to prove his married lover's husband was not the father of the baby.
It's true that having PR or his name on the bc wouldn't give the father rights to have contact with the child. But generally courts consider it best for the child to have contact with both natural parents, even in cases where the parent has mh problems or convictions for violent crimes. Courts rarely agree to no contact at all.
Contact could take place in a supervised environment. With no contact any risk of harm children suffer has to weighed against the harm they suffer if they lose a relationship with one natural parent altogether. Psychiatrists and psychologists consistently tell the family courts that children who are insecure about their natural parentage tend to grow up with low self esteem, leading to behavioural and emotional problems in later life such as dysfunctional relationships in adulthood.
If i was her...
Id say i slept with another man around the time, either way hes going to get a DNA.
He has to get the DNA then get PR then a Contact Order(which i doubt because he sounds a twat)
Having PR does NOT GIVE him rights to have contact with the child.
PR is only saying e.g what schools.
As you have been told above, the information you have provided is fundamentally incorrect, digerd.
Furthermore, the CSA do not 'demand' or otherwise order paternity tests nor does that agency have any involvement in the national Registers of Births or correcting/amending information shown therein.
digerd- this is in fact incorrect.
a confirmation of paternity does not make an automatic right to be on the birth cert. it is not illegal for mum to not put it there.
if father claims he is daddy ad paternity test confirms he will have to make an applicaion to the court to be put onto the birth cert and be granted PR. it is not an automatic right when he confirms he is the dad!!!
This sound awful but i was in a similar situation.
He said bby was not his, tried to strangle me and said to - get rid of it!!
now he know i have baby he applied to court to find me. he told some of our riends that the cour tried to find me but couldnt?? i dontknow if that is possible but thats what he said.
anyway- i am now married etc and my DH treats him like heis his own son and we have decided that if it came up we would tell him baby is not his.
i would rather be branded a slag, than let him near my baby.
somepeople on here would say its wrong but i disagree, she has to protect her baby and unfortunately in the UK court does not do it very well.
Why does auto correct turn digerd into divers? I only just noticed that.
Digerd - that is not correct, if unmarried the father's name can only go on the birth certificate if he chooses to attend the registration process - he doesn't have to go. If you register a child under these circumstances it doesn't say unknown it stays blank.
The OP has already said that the CSA are not involved.
Beryl - no just because he is proved to be the father via a DNA test does not mean his name goes on the birth cert and he does not therefore get automatic parental responsibility - so your friend can rest easy there.
That is what I thought Anita, so was a bit confused by divers comment
The unmarried (to the mother) father can only add his name to the birth certificate if the mother is present or he had a statement ir order of PR. DH has a DNA test, and contact order for DSD but cannot be named on the birth certificate without the above. He does not have PR.
Naming on the birth certificate confers PR, if after a certain date, and a man cannot name himself as the father on the birth certificate unless he has official permission.
The fact that you allege he has been violent and has mental health issues does not mean he doesn't have the right to know if the child is his and more importantly that the baby shouldn't know where they come from.
Divers, what then if the father refuses to registrar the birth with the mother, how can the birth certificate be illegal? Are you sure that is correct?
The CSA would demand a DNA test.
The real father's name is legally required on a birth certificate, unless it is unknown to the mother. If she is unmarried, the father has to attend and sign acknowledgement at registration.
It is ILLEGAL, to register a false name knowingly. If later a DNA proves that the father's name on birth certificate is false, then it must be removed, and real biological father registered, if he wants that, if unmarried. If married, the mother can register the father's name without her husband being there so long as she produces the marriage certificate. It will be assumed it is his. If a later DNA test proves he is not the biological father, then his name should be removed, as birth certificate gives false information.
If the unmarried father is proved to be the dad, then the birth certificate is false if states " unkown", and is a legal requirement that the BC includes the father, when known. The mother does not have a right to refuse to correct an incorrect declaration on a birth certificate re. the father's name
How, he can enforce it though, I don't know. But the CSA might do that.
Beryl, no man can insist on being on the birth certificate, unless PR is ordered or agreed on in court. My DH knows this by bitter experience. Only mothers are automatically allowed to be on the birth certificate where the parents are unmarried.
She has never actually disputed that he is the father - she told him when she was pg (although he denied he was the father at the time - now he is saying different, because it suits him). She has no intention of not telling the child who the father is, once able to understand.
It's just that I thought that since he wasn't named on the birth certificate, that by forcing her to submit to a DNA test, he could therefore insist on being named on the birth certificate, and from there gain automatic parental responsibility. Is this wrong then?
If he has already got legal aid, will this cease in April, or will it continue since it has already been granted?
You didn't like my first post and may not like this but I promise it is the best thing your friend can do.
She need to tell him he is the father if she knows he is, he can't take her to court for a DNA if paternity isn't being disputed (if she lies it will go against her later on).
Say if he wants contact he has to go to court and send him a solicitors letter so say so if possible. If he needs legal aid this will stop in April so try and keep things going for as long as possible as I doubt he will have the money to do it himself nor the inclination to self rep. It is a long process starting with mediation, CAFCASS will get involved, tell your friend to read their website (I'm rubbish at putting links on here). She will get support.
It is about the rights of the child not his rights. Tell her to read up on as much as she can and whilst it does seem wrong at the moment it doesn't mean that things will turn out badly for her, things will turn out fine if she tells the truth and seeks professional advice. Keep strong, children's services will not let this get out of hand as long as she tells the truth. It will take a long time for anything to happen and when it does it will be a slow process. Read up as much as you can, ring CAFCASS but do not be seen to be totally obstructing contact she wanting the best for the child which you do.
like I said I agree in essence with athing, but I think every case should be judged on its own unique merits, there are so many hypotheticals that could be put to this and I would have a diffent opinion on them but I accept the law has powers to interviene also and can instruct a dna sample in any case they see fit, however I hold my own moral judgemnet based on what is best in every situation for everyone involved. I dont see it as black and white like you, I can see possible gray areas and that is not complete and utter bollocks. its just a difference. Im not saying in every blanket hypothetical situation there is and should be no right.
I think a violent man who has no true interest can only cause more damage than good in finding out if this child is his, in comparison to a man who wishes to know in order for him to do the right thing moraly for him self and his hypothetical child.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.