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

[HorsePeopleAreStablePeople]

I often see people on here tell the OP to refuse to put the father on the birth certificate. AIBU to think it's fundamentally wrong to deny parental rights to a child's parent and it's wrong for a baby to have a blank space on their birth certificate where their father should be unless the father is unknown because it's their birth and heritage information?

I know that women often do it to make sure the father has no say over the child because they think they know best and want to make all the decisions but I just don't think it's fair to deny parental rights to fathers.

If a father could refuse rights to the mother there would be uproar and rightly so, so why isn't it the same when women deny fathers their rights?

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

I find it really odd that women aren't allowed to care about mens rights without being accused of either being a man, internalised misogynist or an MRA. I have lots of men in my life that I love, why wouldn't I care about their rights?

I grew in the era where fathers for justice were dressing up as spider man and climbing buildings because they were being denied access to their children.

Equality means rights for all, not just more and more rights for women and fuck men cause they have enough.

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.

Here you go again.

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

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.

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

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.

^ this.

Some parents lose parental responsibility for a range of reasons and some fathers can be a danger to their children. Men are known to be more dangerous towards women and children than women are. So to me it's important that women have the ability to make that choice in necessary circumstances. (Which men can always contest). Given that domestic abuse is more likely to affect women I think it's also important that this isn't exploited by men to further weaponise children against their mother.

However I do feel children should have access to information (appropriate for their age and level of understanding) as to who their father is for medical reasons as well as understanding who they are and their journey as a person through childhood. So to me, there should be a reason given as to why its being left off. Naturally that reason may be father unknown...

OP you are very naive to assume that the courts will stop an abusive father from seeing his child. You only have to read some of the threads on here where men use the Family Court to carry on their abuse of their wife/partner or even the child.

Even where there has been physical abuse it is rare for the court to remove parental responsibility. There was a thread on here recently where a mother had to spend thousands of pounds having parental responsibility removed and I think the father might even have been in prison.

When you are in a loving relationship with the father of your child it is hard to imagine how a man can use his children to carry on abuse.

Because it’s like a white person caring about “white people’s rights”. White lives matter. Get it? Fathers for justice were an appalling movement and no doubt responsible for the awful stuff that goes on in family courts today that puts women and children at such risk.

Also fathers for justice is a known front for abusive scumbags

Exactly this.

Some paedophiles haven't had their 'rights' revoked. It is not an easy thing to do.
What you don't seem to want to hear is that not everyone is you, has your circumstances or your husband/father of your offspring.
It would be fabulous for all concerned if there were no abusive/wastrel/disappearing fathers but unfortunately there are, and these men are cunts.
These fathers have either not been around at all, were abusive during the relationship/pregnancy or not shown up for the registering of the birth.
In which of these circumstances do you believe 'wimmin' should put 'menz rights' first, over and above their own safety and the wellbeing of their child?

Nope.

Then I have no idea why you care such about their rights, but it is very sad.

Not at all. I am suggesting a woman shouldn't unilaterally decide a father can't have parental rights.

There's no such thing as 'parental rights'. No parent has 'rights' only responsibilities. That what the R stand for.

my assessment based on facts is certainly worth more than your half baked opinions on a subject you clearly know very little about

This is true. The opinions of people who know things have higher value than the opinions of people who don't, but haven't let that stop them wading in anyway.

But what if a court ordered contact with him?

And what if your capability to protect your daughter was impeded by the fact that, if you denied him contact, you'd be at risk of accusations of parental alienation?

What if your reports were considered problematic and you weren't believed or taken seriously?

And what if that meant your daughter could he removed from your care and placed with him?

There is a woman who posts on here who is in that exact situation at the moment.

Also fathers for justice is a known front for abusive scumbags

I think you only have to read their headlines on their website to realise this.

However, that doesn't mean that there aren't men out there who are unfairly denied access to their children and it isn't good enough, in my opinion, to just say they need to take it to court (because that takes money and knowledge and requires that you're not so ground down and fed up that you can work your way through the process which is long and difficult and, at times, humilliating - that was my experience, as a mother, who's ex attempted to make it so I never saw our children). The misogyny in the system is....it's just there, but there are still men who struggle and there are still children who don't see their dads because an ex is vindictive and has played the system well. None of that takes away from the very many women forced to face their abusers on a regular basis doing handovers as well as the forced contact 'for the sake of the children' through the phone/text/emails, the stalking, the looking in the bins (yes, really!), or even using the fact that you've painted the door as some kind of evidence that the children are being abused.

I don't have answers. But there are children being shafted by at least one of their parents all over the place. I wish it were easier to get to the truth and to get those children both their parents in their lives without hassle and upset and stress. I don't think that will be acheived by always believing women. Nearly always. But not always.

I think it's more wrong to guess at who the father is.

Mandatory DNA tests for all babies.

Ah god OP you crack me up
you really do
bless

Fathers for justice
pmsl

I don't agree with that. DNA testing is just another way to abuse women, it's a suggestion that women are all liars and shouldnt' expect to be believed or that somehow we are all wanton harlots out there tempting all and sundry and need to be reined in.

My ex used the threat of DNA testing as a means to abuse me - told the CSA our children weren't his. Put me through having to have a conversation with a stranger on the phone essentially about my sex life and how I knew that the children were definitely my ex's. Then, after having no choice but to agree to testing if I wanted to claim maintenance (which he's never paid), my ex didn't live up to his side of the bargain and didn't bother sending in his sample. Because why would he fork out £hundreds to find out something he already knew?! That would've been too easy. Instead, he told a court that he wasn't our children's father and wanted a DNA test. Fortunately, a (male) judge listened to my solicitor about what had happened with the CSA and told him to sod off. Not in those words, exactly....! But of course his point there was to tell the courts that I was somehow not to be trusted, less than decent, not quite a good enough mum. He didn't get what he wanted - frankly he wasn't clever enough and it was easy enough to sweep up his trail of crumbs behind him with the truth....I got what I wanted in court which, many years later, I believe was in my children's best interests. They agree too. But it was the ex's behaviour that stopped it being the 50/50 he wanted. Someone with half a brain would be able to play the system way better than he did.

Mandatory DNA testing is not the way forward.

Let's discuss the practicalities here.

Not much use DNA testing a baby for proof of paternity unless you're also testing anyone who might be the dad too. That realistically means anyone a mother names as a possibility. How do you think this would be paid for, and do you envisage coercive powers being used against the men who don't want to provide their DNA to the state? What are we going to do when there are inevitably mistakes?