To think it's wrong to refuse to put a father on the birth certificate

OP were your parents abusive? Or has your husband been in the past? You seem to think very highly of abusive men and their ability to parent. Infact, it seems men getting 'rights' is way more important to you than child safety.

Also fathers for justice is a known front for abusive scumbags. No men are denied access to their children. Some men don’t bother fighting for access to their children. That is the issue.

You’re allowed to care about men’s ‘rights’ but your caring has blurred into posting inaccurate and frankly offensive bullshit online about a topic that is very emotive for many women who have suffered abuse and had to take steps to protect themselves and their children

Then you would be of an age to have read the reports about many members of FFJ being abusers and using their 'campaign' to further abuse their children's mothers.

Here you go again.

men have rights. No one has denied them rights. You misunderstood a basic topic, that is all this is.

I’m shocked you’re still discussing men’s rights when the majority of people are discussing the parents having responsibility. The child has the rights including the right to be protected from abuse.

You speak with authority as if you know how to protect a child’s right not to be abused by their own father. However, you have not listened to those of us with personal and/or professional experience. Not inviting your abuser to register their child is one of many ways to protect your child’s right to an abuse-free life. Some abusive men will not go to the effort to apply for PR so it absolutely is a good move if the man is a risk.

AIBU to think it's fundamentally wrong to poke your nose in to other people's business when you have no idea why a mother might want to protect their new child

Oh yes, we all know rape convictions are almost guaranteed so that would definitely work 🤔

What if he doesn't come to the registry office?

Its almost funny.

These boards are full of women, desperate for the Fathers of their children to take responsibility. - Emotional/practical/financial.

How do you propose to manage that then?

It's not that I don't care about men's rights.

It's just that I think men's rights are a lower priority than women's rights and children's rights.

Id go so far as to suggest that an DNA test should be carried out to ensure the father IS the father.

How do you think this would be paid for, and what if the man/men the mother names don't want to cooperate? It sounds very impractical.

If the baby came from consensual sex, I think the father should be on the birth certificate. If they are useless or awful that needs managing, but it's a legal document, and I do think he should be there.

A birth certificate should be a factual record of who the parents are of a baby, plus when and where the baby was born. Id go so far as to suggest that an DNA test should be carried out to ensure the father IS the father. Obviously there are times when the mother will not have the details of the father, so his details would remain blank.
Having one’s name on a BC should not automatically give a father PR against the wishes of the mother, but neither should the wishes of the mother to not put his details on the BC be an automatic right.
The thing is, we see a BC as more than what it really is - a record of birth.
I also believe any baby who is created as a result of surrogacy (which is tantamount to child trafficking IMO) should have the details of it’s mother and father on the BC, as should babies who are adopted at birth. Keeping secrets and hiding information which is often discovered later in life never ends well for the person who holds the BC.

It's interesting that OP hasn't engaged with any of the posts explaining to her that she's wrong to blithely assume she could protect her DC from an abusive father with PR.

Do you think we live in a world where men as a group face structural disadvantages and inequalities?

You should be.

Your obsession with 'rights', particularly men's rights is excruciating.

All whilst avoiding any mention of the word that really matters 'responsibility'.

It would have given him parental responsibility for her.

Whilst I understand your viewpoint, presumably having him named as father would have made not a jot to how he behaved towards you.

OP, "reporting" someone with PR doesn't then make it easy to prevent contact. When I found out extent of XH's issues, I reported it: to the police (how he treated me, his DUI etc), SS (I wanted to do all I could to ensure that DC were safe and I wanted input from them to see that I was doing all I could) and to the DC's schools. The ONLY thing that helped me was PSO (for XH to have just supervised contact). Even then, the PSO lasted a year (had XH not sorted himself out, I could have applied to have it extended). Luckily the Judge also ordered a CAO which gave my DC some more protection (they were to reside with me only, and no overnight stays with XH, even after PSO finished).

The PSO cost me thousands (solicitor fees, Court etc). Not everyone has that sort of money. I needed the solicitor as I was also working FT, parenting the DC on my own, going through a nasty divorce, grieving the death of my parents (and the end of my marriage*).

*I couldn't have predicted that XH would turn out like he did. Not when I met him, not when I agreed to marry him and not when we TTC and had a DC together. As I said in a previous post, he did sort himself out and behave better, but that PSO meant that I didn't have to risk handing DC over to him when he wasn't in any fit state to parent DC.