"Change to birth laws means end to fatherless children"

[Creole]

"Look at in here

Well, my ex h is named on my son's birth certificate and that did not prevent him from disappearing. My DS doesn't even know him, even though we were married. And the useless CSA, can't do a thing to help with maintenance.

So, whether thay are named on the BC or not the children can still end up fatherless (like my ds).

What do you think?

Link didn't work - try this

I'm opposed - seems to me an attempt to control/bully/harass women. The idea that you will have to stand in front of the registrar like a naughty girl and beg to be excused is patronising in the extreme.

end to fatherless children? what, so they are going to ensure contact and maintenance are they???

pointless and humiliating for single mothers IMHO.

Sorry re link

That's exactly what I thought TotalChaos, it certainly hasn't helped me.

couldnt read your article the link had a tech error on, but am sure how i feel about this.

my main upset with dd1's not dad not wanting to have anything to do with us was that her birth certificate would say 'father unknown' when we know damn well who he is. after seeking legal advise i found that i could apply to the family courts to make him have his name on her birth certificate but that doing this may just cause me more difficulties as it gives him instant rights. i.e. when i met my new dp xp could have tried to stop dd1 living with him and i would need to seek his permission to take her out of the country for holidays etc. i decided that it would better if just left off her bc as he was a complete twunt who would have made things very difficult for me and dd.

am wondering wether i made the right decision now though as i often feel bad for his family that they have not gotten to know this wonderfull little girl due to xp being an utter tosser. we havent heard anything from him since i was pg, he didnt even phone to ask if she had been born okay.

would the new changes mean any changes in what rights absent and non resident parents would have? if not i can only see it causing people more stress as i know that i made xp have his name on dd1's birth certificate i would be be having contsant battles with him.

What about children conceived through rape? I doubt the father will sign the birth certificate in this respect.
Yes, this system does seem demeaning to some mothers....

I don't think this applies to rape/difficult cases

okay after reading the link, no i dont think that this would be a good idea. as i said had xp's name been on dd1's birth certificate i can only see that i would have had constant problems with him. as he would have had rights that he could have used to try and rule my life. he wouldnt have been in touch to help dd1 develope it would have been to upset me and make things as difficult as possible, due to the fact he may have had to pay for her.

this man tried to call social services about me when i was still pg and told me that if i made him pay for this baby he would ensure that he had full custody off her by the time she was 3. she is now four and i havent heard a peep from him. however the csa is rubbish so he has not had to start paying for her yet either.

Got this from another newspaper....

"Ministers believe that making it a legal responsibility for fathers to register births jointly with mothers will also make it easier to settle disputes over child maintenance" - Well, it didn't help my case.

"Fathers who refuse to be named and mothers who do not record the father's name are liable for a £200 fine".

Waht planet are these ministers on?

total rubbish how would they enforce it fairly in all cases?

all i wanted for dd1 was to have a father for her however as i said after legal advise decided it would be better if his name wasnt on there also he didnt want to be named due to the fact he might have to pay for her so who would be fined in my case? him, me, both of us?

wouldnt they just be better putting there time and money into sorting out the csa instead of making things even more difficult for single parents?

having said that though i would have liked a way to force him to at least communicate with me regarding dd1. absent fathers do get let off far to easily while mummy is left holding the baby with all responsibilities financial and otherwise, daddy gets to live his old life going out whenever he chooses.

i dont think that this is way to deal with it though. some sort of enforced mediation if either party wants to persue this maybe?

The govt has really lost the plot now. If a father doesn't want to be invlolved then a piece of paper is not going to make any difference. If the CSA was properly organised then some fathers might take notice.

Tis a joke frankly.

If it's up to the Registrar to use their judgment and 'allow sole registrations if getting both parents? names would be ?impossible, impractical or unreasonable' then it won't be applied fairly to all anyway. How is the Registrar qualified to make that decision - particularly in relation to 'unreasonable' . My definition of unreasonable isn't the same as the next person's.

TBH Mothers will just say they don't know who the father is or his whereabouts and then nothing further can be done.

It's a load of tosh and not worth the paper it's written on. things like this make my blood boil. it's like going back in time!

what worries me is that we DO seem to be going backwards, the hard won rights of women seem to be being undermined in very quiet, stealthy measures - back to the point though, if a man wants his name on a birth certificate he should also sign an agreement promising to provide bed/board and lodging until said child is 16!

here here, I definately agree with that. Just don't understand the point of this change of law.....

That report said it worked in Australia - I wonder how they work it there.

I thought it was great that dp automatically gor parental rights by signing the birth certificate back in '03. I also thought it was great that it was my decision that he was named. The registrar was very careful to explain that to me. Maybe that was just me enjoying the power.

what is the current law if the father attempts to get his name on the birth cert and the mother does not want him to be allowed/ denies he is the father?

He can apply to the court for parental rights, BOD.

exactly creole - if the change of law STILL does not compel(sp?) a man to provide for a child what is the point of the change?

it would seem to me to be yet another way to penalise women who very possibly may be in need of state benefits!

the csa told me 14 years ago if I did not tell them the whereabouts of my dds father my benefits could be 'in jeapordy'

from a male POV i'd be glad to see this law brought in over here (ireland) as i would fear that in the event of a bad break up with a partner who was pregnant keeping me from getting my name on a birth cert could just be another weapon in her arsenal if she was that way inclined.

Bod, two women are killed by their husbands/partners every week in the UK. I hardly think your theoretical dispute with a theoretically pregnant partner justifies putting even more women at risk.

sorry but what is the link between registering fathers in future on the birth cert and current homicide figures?

Because there may well be bloody good reasons why a woman does not want the man involved. And you shouldn't have to stand in front of the registrar like a naughty schoolgirl and divulge personal information if that happens to be the case.

And because having the father's name on the birth certificate doesn't mean anything about involvement - plenty of men who ARE on birth certificates who fuck off and have nothing to do with their children.

"Because there may well be bloody good reasons why a woman does not want the man involved"

i thought theoretical situations where not a good enough justification only 2 posts ago, now they are?

2 women being murdered a week by current or ex partners isn't theoretical, it's real.