Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

wwyd parental responsability and risks

37 replies

Oppsididitagain · 14/06/2012 12:05

right im about to go out so im not posting then hiding, and i really want to know what you think about this

say you got pregnant as a result of a short relationship but were delighted to be having a baby you dont marry the babys dad and dont think you ever would you mostly get on with the dad but occasionally row, if every time you rowed the dad threatned to just pick up the baby and walk out (your a normal household no cp related issues from your side and never have been but dads extreamly inexperanced with a huge lack of understanding about feeding and whats safe or not safe dad dosnt do anything to do with actual care needs on any basis even half an hour is a struggle for him as he cant deal with any crying, not slating just stating fact). if you genuinly belived he would just leave with baby and not come back

would you name him on a birth cert in the full knowledge that this means he has PR and if he did do that then the police wouldnt even attempt to help you get baby back asap?

or would you leave him off it knowing that this would mean you would have help to get baby returned asap?

im NOT asking about depriving dad of a meaningful relationship/ contact or anything like that just about the pr issue.

so thoughts please.

OP posts:

WorraLiberty · 14/06/2012 12:39

Surely the Father can insist his name is on his child's birth certificate?

The Mother shouldn't get to pick and choose, given the fact the child is both of theirs?

I think in this situation, I would go to court and get the custody/contact thing written in stone but I would be fully prepared for the court not to grant automatic right to the Mother just for the sake of it.

TroublesomeEx · 14/06/2012 12:46

Unfortunately for you, you don't own your baby.

AnitaBlake · 14/06/2012 12:57

The mother does get to choose to an extent. DH isn't on SDs birth certificate, and can't go on unless her mum goes with him to put it on, unless he pays to go to court to gain PR, at which point he can go to the registry office himself and have the birth certificate altered.

Sandalwood · 14/06/2012 12:59

Are you genuinely worried he'll run off with the baby then?
I'm pretty sure he can apply for PR without you anyway.
Not going to help with your rows much is it?

PomBearWithAnOFRS · 14/06/2012 13:01

I don't think he can insist if they aren't married - he would have to have a court order to force a paternity test and then apply wouldn't he? It's the mother who says "he is the father" and he has to be present and agree, for his name to go on the certificate. If she just goes and registers the baby without him, there's nothing he can do unless he goes to court. If he did turn up, having found out when and where the mother was resigstering the baby, she would have to say "it's not his child" which could possibly have some repercussions, although if she just says she's not sure, how could anyone ever prove it one way or the other? (her not being sure I mean, paternity is provable)
The mother would have to get proper advice as to the exact letter of the law covering registration of births though, and make sure of the facts before she did anything. There's nothing illegal about her just going and registering the baby alone though, and if the father does want his name on the certificate, he does have to be there.
There is surely something seriously wrong with a man who would use a newborn as a weapon in this way though, and something wrong in the relationship if they row often enough, and the baby is under six weeks old (which it must be if it's not registered yet), that the mother thinks he would do it and he says it often, even though he isn't up to feeding/caring for the baby properly. I reckon whose name is on the birth certificate is the least of their problems...

Krumbum · 14/06/2012 13:04

He sounds horrible, he's threatening and using emotional blackmail and that's wrong. Also doing no actual care so what's the point in him? Id leave him off it and he can prove to me that he actually wants to be a father, I wouldn't want someone so manipulative around my child. I don't want him to be able to kidnap her and the police do nothing! Leave his name off.

dixiechick1975 · 14/06/2012 13:06

If you are not married - father only gets PR if he goes with the mother to register birth.

If you are married either parent can register in others absence but both get PR.

My understanding though is if the father without PR applies for contact for example, this will be in conjunction with an application for PR.

Tamisara · 14/06/2012 13:07

If you are not married, then you can't put the dad's name on the certificate, unless he is physically present.

DS's dad came with me to register DS, but then told the registrar that he wasn't the father which was very embarrassing. I did, however, allow him contact till DS was 13, at which point he was then not allowed any contact until DS turned 18

Pandemoniaa · 14/06/2012 13:11

You can't reasonably deny that he is the baby's father (and thus has responsibilities) although the mother could just go and register the baby herself since in order for his name to go on the birth certificate, the father has to be present for the registration.

I'd be more bothered about the threats to remove a newborn baby as the result of an argument. In fact I'd be extremely bothered about this and would seriously consider the basis on which this particular father had access. I'm not saying he should be denied the chance to see his child but this is not, in any sense of the word, normal behaviour and if there's a chance he will kidnap the child then perhaps supervised access would be more appropriate .

Inexperience has nothing to do with it - I'd never had anything to do with caring for babies until I had my own and neither had their father but we didn't attempt to resolve disagreements by threatening to take the babies away from each other.

As PomBear says, names on birth certificates are the least of this couple's problems.

Sandalwood · 14/06/2012 13:15

"he would have to have a court order to force a paternity test and then apply wouldn't he? "
Yep that's it. A parental responsibility order.

ChocHobNob · 14/06/2012 13:26

If the father has been told he is the father, then he wouldn't need to apply for a paternity test, just for Parental Responsibility Order. The only reason a paternity test would need to be ordered by the court in these circumstances (ie. father believes he is the father) is if the Mother said he wasn't the father and that would be wrong if she knows for certain.

wfhmumoftwo · 14/06/2012 13:27

i;m not a laywer but my understanding was that if unmarried, even having the fathers name on the birth certificate does not assume parental responsibility. PR relates to issues such as can the school gain permission from dad, can doctors talk to him regarding childs health and does dad have the legal right to give permissions on those such things. I think you have to go to court to get that in the case of dispute. Could be wrong so best get it checked out by proper advisor.
However, parental responsibility does not equal custody. You can have a PR but not custody so its highly unlikely that in the (unlikley) event he did just walk out with child that he would gain custody.
I do agree with other posters that its not saying alot for your relationship with such threats of kidnap being used (even if they are in the heat of the moment) It sounds like he is being quite immature about this. Everyone rows, especially with a newborn on the scene.
Are you actually scared he will go through with it or is he just saying that to frighten you? Either way, not conducive to a healthy relationship
WOuld suggest you arrange a 30 min free consultation with a solicitor to go through so you know exactly where you stand

GrahamTribe · 14/06/2012 13:27

I wouldn't put his name on the birth cert and I wouldn't allow him within a mile of my child either.

sc2987 · 14/06/2012 13:29

It's not the least of their problems at all. If they split up (which they clearly should as he sounds abusive and neglectful), him having PR gives him a massive hold over his ex.

Definitely don't put him on the birth certificate. If he wants to be involved and truly responsible for the child (doubtful, judging by current behaviour) he can show that by going through the legal channels to get PR if it's granted.

Otherwise he will just use it as a way to control you, like my estranged husband, who has also threatened to remove or not return our (breastfed) daughter to my care. He also provides no meaningful care for her (like taking her to the toilet etc) when there is contact.

dixiechick1975 · 14/06/2012 13:31

Law channged 2003? to say that if father is named on birth certificate he automatically gets PR.

Pandemoniaa · 14/06/2012 13:32

i;m not a laywer but my understanding was that if unmarried, even having the fathers name on the birth certificate does not assume parental responsibility.

I'm not sure that this is 100% correct. Admittedly I'm basing it on the experience of going with ds2 and ddil (unmarried) to register dgd. The registrar said that she was required to make it very clear to ds2 that having his name on dgd's birth certificate came with parental responsibilities. Not that he wanted otherwise, I hasten to add!

Glitterknickaz · 14/06/2012 13:33

wfh not as of 2003, as of then fathers named on birth cert automatically have PR

PullUpAPew · 14/06/2012 13:34

wfh You are incorrect, since 2003 any father named on BC has PR. Prior to that it was only if married.

Only way dad would not have PR is if not named on BC. Dad can still apply (fairly straightforward) to get PR through courts.

I would get legal advice about leaving him off and the implications of doing it.

ChocHobNob · 14/06/2012 13:35

Dixiechick is right, it changed in 2003. Unmarried fathers named on birth certificates now get automatic PR like mothers.

ChocHobNob · 14/06/2012 13:37

If you think he would go through with his threats you need to apply to court for a residency order in your name. If you have these threats written down, it will strongly help your case.

DailyMailSpy · 14/06/2012 13:37

But the father could go to the courts and get a parental responsibility order, as other posters have mentioned, and get put on the birth certificate if you refused to put him on it to begin with.

I'm pretty sure the police would get involved though if he took the child away without your consent as you'd be the resident parent.

GrahamTribe · 14/06/2012 13:44

If he has PR and there are no protection issues AFAIK the police can do nothing - he is, after all, a parent in law and has as much right to custody of the child as the mother does until and unless a court specifies otherwise.

That's why not putting a control freak like this on the BC is essential, he may not even bother to apply for PR if he realises that the mother is standing up to him and that it's going to cost him money. And, if he does go ahead, well, you have to do what your conscience tells you you have to do to protect your child and yourself. I know what I'd do but others mighr prefer a more conventional path.

PullUpAPew · 14/06/2012 13:45

Dailymailspy No the police would not get involved if he has PR, not unless in breach of a court order. So if there is no court order and the child was removed from OP, then OP would have to go to court for an order to restore.

I think that's right! Someone with more knowledge will come along soon..

ChocHobNob · 14/06/2012 13:46

If the father has PR the police have no responsibility to return the child to the mother if there are no welfare risks. The only way a child would be returned to a parent would be if that parent held a Residency Order in their name alone. And even then, sometimes people have struggled with getting police involved and have had to make emergency hearings at court to have the child returned.

RabbitsMakeBrownEggs · 14/06/2012 13:49

You can go and sign the birth certificate alone and say you do not know who the father is, then he has to get a solicitor and get parental responsibility, which would ensure that he has his rights, but you also have organised things through solicitors - hopefully including a residence order (yours), child maintenance and contact - which means that he cannot snatch the baby without it being viewed very badly.

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread