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’?

[mumofoneAloneandwell]

I’m about to watch Matlock, season 2, and iirc the dad hadn’t bothered to be a father but now wants to come back now the boy is older.

Imo there should be a statute of limitations on this. So many men don’t want to do the child rearing but are happy to exercise their right to parenting once the kid is older.

i said for men because it’s mostly men who do this, but provided the mother abandoned her kid with family/the dad, and wasn’t unwell due to the trauma of becoming a mum (ie being raped) then I’d of course include them in this

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.

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?

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

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

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.

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.

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

It would be up to the father to prove this, and the court to determine

I can see men faking call attempts and letters sent, to continue to control the mother of their children, whilst they don the appearance of ‘trying to be a better man’

the current situation is just sexist and harmful to women and children imo - as well as to the small percentage of lone dads this also applies to!

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.

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.