Giving up parental responsibility

[BigRedLondonBus]

I’m pretty sure this isn’t a thing in the uk but I have heard it mentioned a few times, but can’t find much from google. Can a man give up his parental responsibility?

Only if his treatment of his child is so bad that a judge removes it, or if the child is adopted. In both cases a court decides.

Men cannot simply decide not to have PR if they already have it.

It has to be pretty severe abuse, neglect emotional or otherwise for the court to decide to remove parental responsibility,there has to be a lot of work done by social services and children's protection before that happens.

A person can abrogate or not use parental responsibility by just not being there to do it or be an awkward bastard. But you just can't say "hey I fancy not bring a parent anymore". Even if you were to go to court and say it, a judge will order a lot of investigation into the whys and wherefores.

But trying to get a dickhead ex to be responsible or reasonable for anything is hard work.Also if you want to enforce parental responsibility, it will be costly, drawn out and as about enforcible as a wet paper bag.

Yes I was thinking about a father voluntarily giving it up. Which isn’t possible then

A parent can go to a lawyer and gave a contract drawn up so say they won't do anything (make sure it has penalty and enforcement clauses) or interfere, but if something was to happen to the primary carer the the courses look to the next available person with parental responsibility. Unless that is a will or a document has been drawn up outlining what should happen is the primary carer is unavailable (by that I mean basically dead).

It's a minefield, so you will need a very specialised lawyer to advise.

Basically some non resident parents think that by giving up parental responsibility it means they don't have to pay maintenance. That's not the case in law.

Giving up parental responsibility is a bit of an urban myth, it's a bit line saying "I'm giving up paying taxes" having it taken away, on the other hand is a big deal. It mean a judge has (based on evidence) decided that someone is not capable of taking or being responsibility

primary carer the the courses look

Should read

Primary carer then the courts look

Also it's a bit line saying

Should be

A bit like saying

Sorry for the lack of commas, and shit spelling, I'm getting my own sprogs ready for contact and I'm knackered today even though I had 10 hours sleep

If the father was married to the mother the only way he can lose PR is if the child is adopted. If he gained PR in some other way (being named on the birth certificate, PR agreement or court order) he still loses PR if the child is adopted and the courts can remove his PR but that only happens in exceptional circumstances. He cannot voluntarily give it up or assign it to someone else. He can, of course, simply choose not to exercise his PR.

To correct the previous poster, if something happens to the primary carer it is not true that the courts will look to the next available person with PR. The courts will only get involved if there is a dispute. They will decide based on the child's best interests, not who has PR. So, for example, if the child hasn't seen the father for years but has a good relationship with the maternal grandparents, the courts are likely to decide that the child should live with the maternal grandparents even if the mother has not said anything about it in her will.

A parent can go to a lawyer and gave a contract drawn up so say they won't do anything (make sure it has penalty and enforcement clauses) or interfere This is made up.

Ok I got that wrong, I misunderstood what I was told