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?

Seems a strange hill for a woman to choose to die on on a website mainly used by other woman the OPs argument
Always heard this kind of viewpoint from those lovely MRA types

A mother can’t just put a man’s name on a birth cert. He either has to go with her to register the birth or a legal document, a statutory acknowledgment of parentage has to be produced.

Even if he's abusive?

Have you seen the abysmal rates of prosecution for rape and domestic violence? Do you genuinely think the authorities get this stuff right?

If the “father” of my baby was a danger to me and therefore very likely to my child, I would do absolutely anything lawful to protect my child - of which not naming the abuser/rapist on the birth certificate is one. Are you really saying you wouldn’t?

Child support is to support the child.

Why should a child be denied the financial support to which s/he is legally entitled just because the father is an unsuitable candidate for parental responsibility?

The child still has needs- food, clothing, toys even if a man isn’t fit to be a parent.

Is @HorsePeopleAreStablePeople really advocating for rapists to be named on birth certs?

Agree with you thoroughly OP. Lots of women - especially on here - seem to enjoy the power trip that comes with being able to deny a child their father.

This.
With bells on.

You are joking, right?

It's parental responsibility not parental rights. Children are not commodities.

Being on the birth certificate gives control. My abusive ex uses that control to mess with me and the kids. Too many abusive men out there. If there were better protection for vulnerable women and children you may have a point but as it stands no I don't agree op. It's easy enough to get added to a birth certificate if the father really wants that and I'm going to court the mother can seek a child arrangement order to give her some protection from an abusive controlling father using child contact to fuck her life up

@HorsePeopleAreStablePeople

You are ignoring the fact that at least one person on this thread who doesn't have a named father on their birth certificate, at a time when it carried big social stigma, still thinks that it should not be a given that a mans name should automatically be there.

As others have said, they need to rock up and ask for it at the point of registration (and lots don't) and if they are being unfairly excluded, we live in a time where they can go the DNA route and it will be given.

My birth father didn't want to know and there are still lots like him 60+ years later. If it makes an abused woman's life a little bit easier not to go that route at birth, I'm all for it. Yes, kids should know who both their parents are, but when there is a non relationship or the risk of abuse of mother or child, they shouldn't have any help or encouragement to make those lives worse.

Well when that woman was raped by her stalker... Maybe she did enjoy taking some control back and not putting that mans name on the BC.

Or that 14 yo that was raped by her father ...

Or the woman that escaped domestic abuse and gave birth scared and alone, and was supported by the women's shelter...

Yeah, what awful women they are, all just on power trips.

Unlike the power trip some men have by being able to control and dictate the lives of their current and ex partners via their shared child/ren.

Men do have the agency to be there for their children without being on the paperwork. Men who give a shit, that is!

If a man is married he automatically goes on, he can also get on by going to court. If he cares enough to be on the birth certificate he can make it happen. Also any decent man who has treated the mother with respect are usually on there. This type of thread just pupates the thought that men are somehow the victim and women are awful. When in fact I don't know a single woman who would keep a good man off the birth certificate. He always has the option not to get a woman he isn't in a serious relationship with pregnant. Just a wild crazy thought.

I am suggesting a woman shouldn't unilaterally decide a father can't have parental rights

She can't unilaterally decide though. It's a pretty simple process for the father to have himself added. Hell of a lot easier than 9 months of pregnancy then giving birth!

This in spaces. My DS father turned violent once I was pregnant. I left and he is not on the birth certificate. I would have had to contact him and invite him to the registry office and the life of my son and my own would have been put in grave danger if I did that. What I did was not wrong and I have not one smidgen of doubt that keeping that man out of his life was the best thing to do for him. Having no father isn’t nice, but having an abusive one is far worse.

I've not read full thread (so sorry if this has been repeated). Even if a father is on birth cert, it won't necessarily mean that CM is being paid or that the father is a decent and hands on parent (can be quite the opposite). It does mean that the father can have a say (legally, as he has PR due to being on the BC) on things like where the child lives, where they go to school, contact, medical treatment, travel/school trips etc. If the father is a decent guy, then great, there's no problem. If he is not, then this can cause all sorts of hell. I've seen too many threads about where an abusive ex has had the children for their contact days and refuses to return them. Police can't really do anything as the father has PR. It sounds like hell. Also when fathers have been abusive and yet contact is still expected to happen (I've seen that with some of my friends...and to an extent, myself).

Example: With my XH, we were married so I was able to add him to BC without an issue. When we split, he'd turned into a monster (abusive....towards me). It wasn't safe at that point for him to have unsupervised contact with DC2: not because he would deliberately hurt DC2 but because (at that point) he was drunk/high most of the time, would drink/drug drive and his behaviour was unpredictable and (therefore) unsafe. It took a Prohibited Steps Order to put some things in place for supervised contact. Had he not been on the BC, it would have made my life back then a lot easier (and I wouldn't have had to shell out thousands for a PSO). If I had not had the PSO, he would have been within his rights to just pick up DC2 from school without my knowledge or consent, and the school would have been powerless to stop him (because he has PR). To be clear, I was never looking to completely stopping contact. I was only stopping contact if he was drunk/high and I was asking for supervised contact during that time. He's fine now, and that's great. But back then, it was hell. Luckily the Judge saw this, agreed with me and granted the PSO. He also ordered a CAO (Child Arrangements Order) be put in at the same time (which said that DC was to reside with me full time, amongst other things).

FWIW, my eldest DC's dad walked when I was pregnant (and we were in an LTR of some years). He refused to have anything to do with DC1 for about 3yrs. He wasn't on the BC as we weren't married and he wouldn't show up for the birth or registering the birth. He eventually saw the light, got back in contact with me and we sorted things out (didn't get back together but I made it clear that if he wanted any sort of contact/involvement, he was to start acting decently towards DC1 and being polite/respectful towards me etc). It was only after some years of him proving himself as a decent father (and to be fair to him, he did) etc, that I sought legal advice and had him added to BC.

Women cannot “unilaterally” deny PR to a father. All they can do is not actively facilitate it, by not inviting him to the registration appointment. If the father wants to be on the BC, there’s a process for him to go through which the woman will not be able to prevent.

So the argument is really not “women shouldn’t prevent this” but “women should do the work for the man”. Sod that.

Good thing women can’t do that then isn’t it.

Issue here is you’re speaking on a subject you know very little about

If I could go back in time I would ensure my abusive ex partner was not on the birth certificate! My 9 year old who has been self harming and threatened to kill herself this evening due to her abusive Father. Yet the courts insist on contact! If he wasn't on the birth certificate she would not be in such a state.

Women can't unilaterally decide anything about parenta rights. If the man does not show up she can't put him on the birth certificate. A man can get added via a court application no matter how abusive or if he is a danger to the child will get added. Women are not able to block men doing this.

I agree.
I think it's very naive to not have an understanding of why many women may not be willing to put the father's name on the birth certificate.
By doing so, it automatically gives the man legal and equal parental responsibility. The reality is, that it can make life very very difficult for the mother and by extension the baby. You only need to read the copious amounts of posts on mumsnet to realise that not all babies are born into a safe and secure and a positive loving relationship between the parents.

@HorsePeopleAreStablePeople

I am, what is your point?

I just wondered how you would feel giving your precious baby daughter over to a man who had abused you, for his weekend access?

@HorsePeopleAreStablePeople
In case you’ve missed it, parents do not have rights, they only have responsibilities. I find it interesting how people who persistently call them “rights” seem to focus on the adult. The child has the rights.

Ultimately it comes down to whether the father turns up at the registry office 🤷‍♀️

My dds dad didn't and hasn't ever wanted anything to do with her.

Why on Earth should he be given parental rights??

Unless the mother knows the father is going to turn up and be a decent parent I don't see any benefit to him being on the birth certificate but I do see risks to the child.