To think that, if you, as a man, abandon your child - knowing full well they’re yours - there should be a ‘statute of limitations’ on how long you have to exercise your ‘fathers right’?

If he gets his act together quickly that is fine. If he has been absent for years, I don’t think it is in the child’s best interest to reappear. He has shown himself to be unreliable and the child already has parental bonds formed.

It is ALL about what the father wants. It's not about what the child and it's certainly not about the mother who is, to all intents and purposes a slave he is given and endorsed by the state to raise his child while he takes or leaves and involvement he fancies. And if she doesn't adhere to the rules? Legal sanctions. If he doesn't? Meh, not much the state can will do.

It's outrageous.

How would you enforce it though?

How do you prove that the father has willingly had no contact with the child as opposed to the mother having changed address without telling him where, told him she’d had a termination, etc.

I think we all know that there are untold amounts of men who walk away from their kids without so much as a backward glance. But I think that we also all know that there are women who absolutely do deliberately withhold access to their children. How do you distinguish which is which when deciding to terminate parental responsibility?

I know that there are people on here who will say that a woman never withholds access to their children unless there is a good reason. But we all know that’s simply not true.

And if you brought in a law which said that after 2, 3 years all parental responsibility would cease, there are absolutely women who would use this to deliberately ensure their children’s fathers had no place in their lives.

In fact I can see the MN posts now. “If you can stay under the radar for 2 years then his parental responsibility will be removed and you won’t have to worry.”

Money should of course be separate, it’s not pay per view. And neither should access be withheld if maintenance isn’t paid.

however I also think that if a woman deliberately chooses not to put a father on the birth certificate, she shouldn’t then be able to claim maintenance without a DNA test to prove the man she is claiming from is the father.

Edited to correct formatting

I do think there should be some sort of process that they would have to go through if they want to waltz back into a child's life after years of being absent. I understand the concept of the child's right to a relationship however, I don't think it's always in the child's best interests in the situation of someone who is basically a stranger whether they are biologically related or not.

My ex has not seen DD for 4 years now, not spoken to her, not even asked after her. When he moved away I wanted a CAO to give a chance at stability but he didn't want that. Last contact was a him lieing to DD about having a hospital appointment so he couldn't have her on the day that he was sneakily moving away. We only found out after the fact.
I've dealt with years of anxiety in her, fear of hospitals (which is especially a pain as she has some birth defects which have needed her to have procedures), fear of being abandoned, and low feelings of self worth. After all the damage control I've been doing I fail to see how allowing contact with someone who's caused all of that can be in the child's best interest.
If she wants a relationship in the future then that is up to her of course and I will guide her through that as best as possible but it does make me angry when I think he could just rock back up and try to insist on it after all this time. Seems much more focused on the father's rights than the child personally.

I think it’s more nuanced than this. Many reasons a man might ‘abandon’ his child and some of them may be for the best to be honest.

When a woman gets pregnant it’s rightly her decision whether to keep the child or not and yes, before anyone jumps me, men have the choice to have sex and wear condoms and blah. Accidents happen, we’re all human. If he doesn’t feel ready to be a father at all and recognises he wouldn’t be a decent one, wouldn’t provide for the child in the way a decent father would then I think it’s fair to abandon ship. It’s better than him sticking around and fucking the child up.

If he grows up and matures and realises later down the line that he messed up and wants to forge a relationship with his child, I think generally this should be nourished and would be beneficial for the child. It depends though and is obviously contextual. If the child is now a teenager, for example, it should be entirely their choice to meet or not and shouldn’t be forced.

IME when fathers come back into their kids lives later on it’s rarely that beneficial for the child, and often only lasts for a short period. If someone can’t be bothered to see their child, they are unlikely to suddenly become father of the year, even when kids are at an easier stage to look after. I’ve seen examples where they see the child for a while and then get bored and stop seeing them, or abdicate parenting to a new partner. None of that seems to centre the child

Im sure there are examples where this isn’t the case, but it does seem common

That would definitely have applied to my mum. My father was wealthy but that wasn't worth the crap we got, partly fuelled by him not wanting to pay

2 people have sex the woman gets pregnant and they talk the mas says he does not want to to be a father he is not ready the women says I dont care I am having it anyway

the father decides later on they want to be involved and you think it is best for the child to say no, will the child thank the mother when they grow up?

I don’t think it is child centered for a parent to come into their life late. Children need and deserve parents who are willing to put in the work.

i don’t think the cost of raising a child is linked to that. Child maintenance is a debt that should never go away, even if it takes a lifetime to pay.

The so called nanny state should do more in some cases.
I worked for people fleeing domestic violence and seen cases where children have watched their father nearly murder their mother, or rape them ortheir siblings and then have a say in that child's life. Often making arbitrary decisions as a form of continued control. That is more "ridiculous".

First off no fathers on the birth certificate no money should be paid, there should be a contract between both parents that they both wanted the child and preferably details of both expectations on what parenting entails before conception, BUT ultimately if the parents can't work out what is best for the child and not the bitching against each other then sadly the courts have to step in or other 3rd parties because as per usual the parenting fighting always seems way more important than any child it seems

I don’t know about a definite end date to contact, I can see scenarios where that wouldn’t be in the child’s best interest.

But, I do think that there should be a simple, legal process whereby lone parents can have it recognised in court that they are the only active parent, and therefore have a casting say over anyone else with parental rights for things like passports, school, medical stuff etc.

Presumably your child is at least 11 years old then? In a few years she’ll be able to do all those things by herself - change her name, get a passport, emigrate, etc. without any input from your ex.

I agree. But as you mentioned it shouldn't mean that financial responsibility ends - that should continue always.

Yes, a child has a right to a relationship with their father but that would be the child's right, not the father's. Once rights have been terminated ( after 2 or 3 years or however long you want to set it), it's the mothers decision to allow communication.

The mother must act in the best interest of her child of course, but he will have no recourse on her decision.

Thank you. It was very, very difficult in the beginning as I was also devastatingly heartbroken and ended up having a breakdown. Got through it though.
I completely agree by the way! In some countries, after 7 years, all PR is/can be dropped completely. No idea why it’s not the case here.

Is that the only way you can make sense of someone having a different perspective than yours? The only way I could become an absent father would be by changing sex and inventing a Time Machine.

I think parental responsibility/the chance to apply for that should be severed after a few years. Adopted DC aren't returned to their biological parents if they turn their life around, why is this any different? If the child has a settled happy life without them, why mess with that?

I think a parent abandoning a child should be seen in law as child neglect.

I think we’ve found one ☝️

Ohhhh well that’s different then! I think OP was referring to fathers who are? Either way, it was cathartic to have my rant.
Hope you’re managing ok anyway, I know how challenging it is to do it 7 days a week. Especially when you know people who get 3 days a week off from parenting! 😆

Sorry but it's not about the mother it's about the child. You are being ridiculous to say a child shouldn't have involvement from their father, or a relationship with him, however hopeless that father is. Do you generally like the idea of a moralistic, interfering nanny state, or is it only when it applies to other people rather than yourself?

He’s not on BC