Don’t put him on the birth certificate

[helpmeplease12345671]

I’m part of a single parent what’s app group and saw a soon to be mum was stating she was going to meet her ex as he wants to co parent. He was absent for a number of months but wants to play a part.

we know that guy is most likely not going to be involved in the life of that child long term etc.

Aibu for agreeing the birth certificate should keep him off it?

Maybe with a genetics test, but how easy would that be if the man doesn't comply?

It IS intended to be a record of biological parentage. Just because they originate from a time before DNA testing, that doesn't mean that this isn't the primary objective. Flip it around: how insulted would you be if you were happily married, had been for years, and you went to register your baby with your husband - and they told him that he had to take a DNA test ostensibly to prove that you hadn't been having an affair/sleeping with another man before they could accept that he IS unquestionably the father?

I'm sure there have always been some BCs throughout history where the father's name couldn't be included - there have probably even been a few without the mother's name as well, in the case where an abandoned baby has been found and the mother unable to be traced - but it was never intended to be an honourific or an optional extra to put the father's name on there, at the discretion of the mother, depending on whether she believed it suited her or not.

But it actually is at the mothers discretion if they are not married.

There is no legal obligation for a mother to name the father on the birth certificate unless, and rightly so, to protect women and children from abusive and unsafe situations.

Totally agree with this. I’d like to see a law brought in that if the mother knew who the father was she’d be legally obliged to name him, with prision time if she doesn’t. The child has a right to know. You cannot withhold those rights from a child just due to a petty grievance.

So you would send a woman to prison for protecting herself and her child?

So if a woman has fled domestic abuse you would force her to go and register the birth alongside her abuser?

You so realise this would never ever happen don’t you? Women have to hide in safe houses fearing for theirs and their children’s lives.

Thats not to mention the amount of absent and disinterested fathers. Would you also send fathers to prison who didn’t attend to register the baby? And those who never pay maintenance and those who abandon the child.

And how could they prove she named the correct man?
Or indeed, how could they prove she knows who the father is?

There’s a lot of misogyny on this thread. People are very unrealistic and idealistic.

There is no way of knowing or proving whether a woman knows who the father is. Unmarried fathers aren’t even legally obliged to attend to register the birth.

Lying about paternity has been going on since the beginning of time. My exes mother was having an affair and none knew who the real father of her youngest was, but she named the new man as the father. There were always doubts about the parentage of my mums younger brother too.

The name on the birth certificate means isn’t a guarantee of paternity. Criminalising women would only harm those who are unsafe they could have been raped/abused.

they wouldn’t have to go together though. She’d just have to give the father’s name. Where’s the abuse in that?

She names someone, he said it’s not him. A DNA sorts it. A man thinks the child is his, she said he isn’t the father, a DNA test sorts it. If he has good grounds to think she’s withheld his name on purpose the police can investigate.

But the father does have to go 🤷‍♀️

If the parents aren’t married, both have to attend to register the birth. That is the law.

Are you ok?

The police haven’t even got the time and resources to investigate serious crime, domestic abuse is at epidemic levels and two women are week are murdered by men, usually a man known to them.

And you think that paternity disputes is a police matter?

In a thread full of stupid, this is a new high.

You can't prove the mother knows who the father is, because she can always say she's slept with more than one person in the relevant period so there's multiple candidates. There are inevitably going to be lots of cases where the mother doesn't know the names of the man/men she's had sex with, as well as genuine mistakes.

In order for it to have any teeth, the state would need the power to force all the men a woman has named to provide their DNA. Give it enough time and lots of them won't be very keen on doing that, particularly the ones that get named because they've done something to piss the woman off (which is going to happen at some point). It would be a hugely unpopular policy with voters.

Approximately 4.5-5.5% of birth certificates don’t have the father named.

Out of that very small number, how many of those do you think were cases where the father didn’t want to attend or be named anyway? How many do you think the mother had more than one sexual partner so didn’t know.

How many women do you realistically think are leaving fathers off birth certificates for no other god reason than spite? Hardly any, that’s how many.

There isn’t an epidemic of spiteful women deliberately denying their children of knowing their father. There IS an epidemic of violent men.

Get your priorities in order.

I saw my next door neighbour’s porche being stolen from their drive, I even exchanged pleasantries with the man. The police didn’t investigate that. She just got a crime number.

You can’t ’name someone’ on a birth certificate unless you are married to them, if they aren’t there. Otherwise people would be putting down Prince William or Darth Vader.

Again my dd doesn't have her father's name on her bc because he refused to come to the registry office. She's still met him and knows who he is. It has made life easier for us. We can travel without the risk of being turned away at passport control. It also means hopefully next year we will be able to apply for step parent adoption and he can't stop it (well he could but he's unlikely to ever find out)

Its disgusting that you think adopted children and those with donor fathers shouldn't know where they came from.

Of course they should

Yes he actually can, if he can be arsed to take her to court for a DNA test and then have it ordered that he be named on the child's birth certificate. Regardless of how he's been with the mum. I was advised of this when my ex after five years of not bothering with his son he suddenly had a solicitor write to me to say he had reason to believe that I was under social services. I spoke to the family support team from my kids school and they told me that dad had every right to take me to court to be added to his son's birth certificate if he really wanted to-not that he ever did mind

if you're not married, you can't put him on the certificate unless he is physically there.

It would be simpler and less risky for her to keep him off it. The child can still know who her father is.

I mean it's not your pregnancy therefore it's not your decision. You're being unreasonable to try to talk this lady into not naming her child's father on the birth certificate.

OP Im not sure of the point of your post was? And im also unsure why you have posted in AIBU because you have argued with every response. If you didnt want the responses..why post?

Or did you just want everyone to back you up and feel validated and then you are annoyed that people have posted (valid) counter arguments to your own opinion and situation?

Names can be added to birth certificates after the fact, no its not an easy process but it can be done and whilst bio dad in this situation might not be a good guy, there are unfortunately plenty of women who treat adding a name to a birth certificate like its a power move.

Absolutely not. Its as much his child as hers

That reminds me of the kind of thinking that men often used to use in the days when they were the only earners and their wives routinely stayed at home: "It's simpler and less risky if I just put the ownership of the house in my sole name... but I can always tell her that we both know it's hers as well, if she objects".

I think it's equally disgraceful for a mother to refuse to tell/allow the father to come along and register as such for the birth certificate, as it is for a father (who knows about the baby) to not to bother ensuring that he goes with her to do so.

You seem to be another person that comes on here asking for an opinion and then argues with everyone that goes against what you think.

For what it’s worth yes I think he should be on the birth certificate - it’s his child and he has as much right to be on there as the mum.

If she doesn’t put him on it he will go to the courts and easily get added.

And to you saying you know what you’re talking about because you work for a solicitors, that’s like someone saying they can give medical advice because they work in a GP reception.

Basicallly sounds like the mum is trying to do what she thinks is the right thing and you’re being biased due to personal experiences.