Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to resist adding my child's father's name onto his birth certificate?

203 replies

stickystick · 24/01/2014 18:00

Was with his father on and off for a year. To my huge shock I got pregnant at the age of 39 (!) despite using contraception and not having any desire for a baby. Decided after a lot of angst and indecision that I couldn't go through with an abortion and instead to continue the pregnancy. The father (to put it mildly) disagreed vehemently with this decision. He is financially comfortable but already has three teenage kids and an alcoholic ex-wife and was worried about the disruptive effect of another child on them. He tried very very hard to get me to have an termination, including promising me a " life of misery" if I didn't. Our relationship ended immediately, needless to say. He was very aggressive and unsupportive during the pregnancy (he was still going on about terminations when I was nearly six months along). We continued contact only to sort out what level of financial support he legally needed to contribute for his child, via the CSA and mediation with a family law barrister.
At one point, when he was being very hostile, I finally said, OK, you win. Let's agree that you don't have anything more to do with us once the baby is born - you don't have to see him, or even tell your family, and thus you can minimise the disruption to your life which you are so worried about. He didn't like that - he said that he didn't want anything to do with the baby now but he wanted to keep his options open just in case things changed in the future.

Needless to say, he didn't want to be there when the baby was born. Refused to let him have his surname (I had suggested the baby had both our names) because he said he had an unusual name and didn't want people knowing it was his son. Wouldn't come to his christening, and asked his own mother to turn down her invitation too. When our son was diagnosed with a serious condition and had to have brain surgery twice in his first six months of life, his father wouldn't come to any of his appointments or operations. Didn't see him at Christmas and has arranged to be elsewhere for his first birthday.

Despite all this though, I've continued to extend an olive branch. Since our son was born, I've regularly sent his father photos and kept him informed about his medical issues. He never rings to ask how his son is, or asks to see him, but every few weeks I offer him the opportunity to see him anyway (very low key), and about half the time he says yes. When he does see him now, usually for a couple of hours every three weeks, he is actually quite affectionate with him. His older sons have now met the baby twice, and his daughter a few times more. It is not the disruptive disaster that he forecast, partly because he was massively over dramatising, but also because the baby lives with me and he doesn't have to do any childcare or any organising of medical stuff or nursery.

The problem between us right now is about the baby's birth certificate. At the time he was registered, his father said he wanted to be named on the certificate because his lawyer had told him there was "no legal downside" - he still had financial responsibilities whether he was on it or not, but being on it would give him a say if he wanted one down the road. I was not very impressed with this reason at the time, not least because at the same time he also mentioned he didn't want the baby to have his surname on the birth certificate because he didn't want anyone to know it was his son (!) I also felt that if he wanted parental rights and responsibilities such as making joint decisions about his medical care, he actually needed to turn up to some scans and appointments. So I went ahead and registered him and left the father's name blank - although he registrar assured me that the father's name could be added very easily at any point in the future, if we both agreed.

I thought that my baby's father had forgotten about this, but a couple of months ago in our last mediation session, he unexpectedly added it to the agenda at the last moment. He said he wanted to be on his birth certificate and he wanted to know when I would add him on. The mediator asked me if I would be willing to do this. I said no, because I felt his reason wasn't good enough. My baby's father said he had better reasons now. The mediator asked what they were, and he replied that a) he didn't think it was very nice for our child to see that he had no named father on his birth certificate when he came to apply for a driving licence or passport. And b) he said that as he was paying £X in child support, it was his right to be on the birth certificate [legally this is not the case: in fact financial support and parental rights and responsibilities are usually strictly separated].

I said I still didn't think this was good enough. He thinks I am being unreasonable. Am I?

OP posts:
Rooners · 25/01/2014 08:45

Oh sure there are worse fathers out there...there are also committed, useful, helpful fathers who mean well and don't arse around wondering how much benefit an action will have for them rather than how they can improve their child's life.

If he cared he would have stepped up regardless of the BC. The fact is he's a self centred dick.

Doasbedoneby · 25/01/2014 08:53

If we are going to state how he feels without knowing him,

I wonder if he feels he's angry as he thinks he's been used as a sperm donor?

OP are you the poster with the long term partner?

mumtobealloveragain · 25/01/2014 08:56

It's not about you deciding if he "deserves" to be on his sons BC. He is his father, the BC is a legal document and therefore he should be named on it.

The fact you're having mediation and mention previous solicitors involvement indicates you/him have already had some legal advice. If you refuse he will likely apply to Court and get added to the BC and gain PR that way anyway. So why create hostility when he's doing to get it regardless of whether you agree.

mumtobealloveragain · 25/01/2014 08:58

Plenty of MOTHERS want an abortion whilst pregnant, if they don't go through with it then it doesn't mean they aren't going to be a good parent once the baby is born. Things change.

coralanne · 25/01/2014 09:02

For 20 years I worked in an industry where I had to sight birth certificates.

There was nothing more sad than a young person handing over their birth certificate with a blank space where the father should be named.

Please put the father's name on the birth certificate. I agree he doesn't deserve it but think of your son when he is of an age to need his birth certificate and there is a blank space where his father should be.

IneedAsockamnesty · 25/01/2014 09:04

Obviously she's not given that the poster you are talking about has a compleatly different situation.

To start with the baby is not born yet

hippo123 · 25/01/2014 09:13

op you have answered your own questions. For very good reasons you don't want him on the birth certificate. Don't do it.

TheDoctrineOfSnatch · 25/01/2014 09:19

Coralanne, why was there nothing more sad than that?

MrsDeVere · 25/01/2014 09:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Rooners · 25/01/2014 09:54

I have three children and none of them has their father named on their birth certificate.

Not one of them is at all bothered by it afaik.

I don't understand why it has to be a problem unless you wish to make it one.

Maybe there is some cultural thing I am missing. The fact is the dad wasn't around to sign, and we weren't married.

Much more relevant to any child is their ongoing relationship (or lack of) with their father. The bit of paper is a bit of paper - it may represent the sadness of a situation, but other than that, the situation is paramount, not some representation of it.

Belmo · 25/01/2014 09:57

I have no father on my birth certificate and am absolutely not bothered in the slightest (and in fact just phoned the registrar to check I don't have to put him on my marriage certificate either).

haveyourselfashandy · 25/01/2014 10:07

YANBU.I think the medical issues cloud this situationAs someone has already said,this man has already treated you appallingly and your son while he was ill.I wouldn't want him to have any parental rights where my sons medical treatment was concerned.

prh47bridge · 25/01/2014 10:27

it's been ordered when it should have been and not when it would be damaging to the child

You are right. The courts start from a presumption that in most cases it is in the child's best interests for the biological father to have PR. It is therefore up to the mother to show that it will be damaging to the child. In the vast majority of cases she will not be able to show that so PR will be awarded.

Similarly once the father has got PR the courts can remove PR (provided he didn't get it by being married to the mother) but will only do so if it can be shown that his having PR is damaging the child.

stickystick - As I said previously, if he applies for a declaration of paternity the only question the courts will be interested in is whether or not he is the biological father. If he is they will issue a declaration which means he will automatically be added to the birth certificate. So if he wants it enough to go to court all you are doing is delaying it.

Refusing to put him on yourself isn't an immediate issue but it could come back to bite you if he applies for other orders relating to your child. He could use this as evidence that you are unreasonable. On its own it would not persuade the courts but if he can combine it with other things you have or have not done it may count against you.

Caitlin17 · 25/01/2014 11:00

coralann "nothing more sad?" Really what a sheltered life you must have led. Perhaps you could have just done your job without applying your own value judgements. You have no idea how the owners of the certificates felt. If you were however in the position of being able to make your own feelings known to them and did so that would have been extremely unprofessional.

stickystick · 25/01/2014 11:48

prh47bridge obviously I can't predict the future but it's highly unlikely he would do any of that. A) he hates courts b) he hates lawyers c) he doesn't care enough. He doesn't actually want any responsibility nor does he want to commit to any regular contact. He has been offered lots of opportunities to be involved in decision making (eg being invited to meetings with the hospital consultants, choosing a nursery, nominating godparents etc) but he has turned them all down. His worst nightmare would be if a court gave him shared care or actual responsibility.

OP posts:
whois · 25/01/2014 11:57

I'm in the YABU camp - the birth certificate is a record of who gave birth and who contributed the sperm as far as I'm concerned. Being named doesn't make you a 'father' in a sentimental way. It's your child's history and record and you're wrong to not put the truth on there, it's nothing to do with you or the man.

eddielizzard · 25/01/2014 12:28

yanbu.

what a total arse. if it can be done at any time, do it when you or your ds want to.

haveyourselfashandy · 25/01/2014 12:33

YANBU.I think the medical issues cloud this situationAs someone has already said,this man has already treated you appallingly and your son while he was ill.I wouldn't want him to have any parental rights where my sons medical treatment was concerned.

stickystick · 25/01/2014 12:57

coralann I think it's a generational thing maybe but these days there seem to be so many reasons why the fathers name is blank. Could be the father was too busy to drop work and turn up to some registry office at 3.03pm on a Wednesday. Could be an anonymous sperm donation. Could be a lesbian couple who don't want to name a father. Could be the mother turned up & didn't realise she couldn't write both names in herself if they weren't married. Or could be the mother chose not to name him at that point, or the father didn't want to be named, or that she wasn't sure who the father was. We shouldn't jump to conclusions about the reasons why, and we shouldn't assume it's necessarily doom and gloom, regardless of which reason it might be.

Am very surprised how opinion on this is divided. So far the main argument from posters that IABU is that a BC is a document of record and should reflect fact. If it was just a matter of that, I wouldn't have a problem. ( In fact, I did announce his birth in the Times, although under my surname & with only his father's Christian name mentioned . So it is on public record. Could be useful if baby turns out to be Prime Minister or marries Mia Tindall or something!) But as other posters have pointed out, a BC is more than just a record, it conveys legal rights and that's the bit I am worried about.

The other IABU argument I've seen is that I shouldn't be using this issue as a political football in a power game. I think there's some truth to that because I am giving it some symbolic significance above and beyond the legal rights and responsibilities issue. I feel that I have been very patient with, very understanding, and very forgiving of the baby's father's behaviour in the last 18 or so months. I have bent over backwards to keep communication going and keep the door open to the baby being able to have a proper relationship with his father. I am always very civil, never lose my temper with his father and am always respectful of his other commitments, even when they are somewhat flaky. (Eg: No, I don't want to see my child as arranged three weeks ago, I've just been invited last minute to a dinner party and I'd rather go to that.)
But the birth certificate I see as a boundary I need to set, which gives a message in terms he understands. It is, look, there are things about which you can be capricious, unreliable, disengaged and even selfish, and I am prepared to put up with an amount of that for my son's sake and because I know this has all been a shock to you too. But there are serious issues about medical stuff, education, religion etc which I will not allow you to mess up and you must show that you are willing to be serious and engaged about. This is my line in the sand.

Ha! In fact I think that's exactly what I am going to say when we next see each other.

OP posts:
Rooners · 25/01/2014 13:26

My only additional comment - as you seem to have it in hand! - is that you should perhaps look at the divide on this thread in terms (largely) of those of us who have experienced this situation, and those who have not.

All the best to you and your little one. Let us know how you get on.

Rooners · 25/01/2014 13:29

Also - sorry - your motives are driven by your child's welfare, as far as I can tell, while his are driven by - possibly a very small amount of that, but it sounds like mostly pride and selfishness.

He is all about him; you are all about your child, well with a bit of you thrown in like in any situation, but you get the point. Smile

IfNotNowThenWhen · 25/01/2014 13:40

Agree with Dahlen (as per)

Don't put his name on. Do nothing, and see if he can be bothered pursuing it himself. If its that important to him, let him do it.
You sound like you have done all the running in trying to get him to step up, and he has done nothing pro-active.
My sons father didn't show up to the registry office on birth certificate day, so he is not on it. It does not say "father unknown" FGS! It just doesn't mention a father.
And it doesn't mean ds doesn't know who his dad is.
When I got ds's passport I asked the registry office about getting his dads name put on, and they said he would have to see a solictor and apply, which I wouldn't have a problem with, but I doubt the Ex will ever be arsed to do it.
If your child's father wishes to be on the birth cert, let him sort it out.

HopeS01 · 25/01/2014 14:19

Fwiw, I wouldn't.

I'm not putting my baby's dad on his birth certificate (I won't be inviting him to the registration), but I will still be claiming child support.

I don't think any of the posters who support the father here have ever been in similar circumstances.

AmazingJumper · 25/01/2014 14:29

Totally agree with your last post OP. Spot on.

IneedAsockamnesty · 25/01/2014 15:43

Reading your last post,I'm actually going to change my stance on the matter, now that does not mean I think he should not have PR nor that I think any court would agree with you.

It just means that IMO I totally understand where your reasons are coming from, your obviously just concerned that it could cause an issue with his medical treatment and I can understand your fears,it's also clear that your only meaning right now and not forever,I'm also guessing if he did go to court unless he does something else concerning your unlikely to attempt to fight it with much effort so YANBU.

Fwiw,from a educational and medical decision thing it's not impossible to obtain prohibited steps orders forbidding interference in those decisions (it's not easy but it can be done) one of my own children has his name on a few of those his dad is not even allowed to be given information about his medical treatment until after he has had it and he cannot consent or refuse consent for any nor can he instruct any third party.so it is doable.

And anybody who thinks that's harsh before you flame me have a little think about the circumstances that would have to happen with a significantly disabled child where 3 judges would agree to that sort of order.