Divorce not yet finalised, can I put my current partner's name on the birth certificate

[twinkletoess]

Hi! I wonder if there is anyone on the same situation as mine before who can help me. I am currently 7 months pregnant with my boyfriend and I am still waiting for the conditional order for the divorce petition to be granted to dissolve my marriage with my husband and I not sure if my final order will be granted early enough before I give birth. Can I still put my boyfriend's, who is the biological father, name on the birth certificate if I am still married to someone else? Thank you to everyone who would help 🤗

I was a few days off being granted my decree nisi when I registered my DC's birth. Her biological father came with me. There are two entries on the register when I google it. One in her dad's name and one in my now ex husband's name. It's strange because the actual certificate is just naming her biological father.

Huge thanks for your comment! Did the registrar require you to bring any additional documents because you were still married with your ex-husband back then?

@Issummernearlyover Huge thanks for your comment! Did the registrar require you to bring any additional documents because you were still married with your ex-husband back then?

No. I didn't take anything. I didn't use my married name either. I think that the paperwork from the hospital which gave details of the birth had my married name as her wristband had her as Baby (legal husband's name). Bizarrely he phoned me and offered to let me register him as the father so that she matched my other children.

The website linked upthread is clumsily worded.

A married man does nto automatically acquire status of father.

At common law only the man whose sperm fertilised the egg can be the legal father. However, even at common law this definition may be qualified by the presumption of legitimacy; namely that a husband whose wife gives birth to a child is presumed to be the father. If he is not genetically the father but neither of them choose to rebut the presumption, though able to do so, he will be treated as the father. In the absence of contrary statutory provision, the common law rule applies whether the child is conceived through natural sexual intercourse or other means of conception. To deny the biological father his paternity can amount to a violation of art 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

A presumption works by an assumption being made which, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, is taken to be fact. In OP's case there is plenty of evidence to the contrary, and there will be no issue with the actual father being recorded as such on the BC.

Until declared otherwise!! Yes. So it’s very clear.

Did you actually read that?

yes, automatically if the mother doesn’t declare at birth registration otherwise

so yes - bottom talk

That's.... Sweet??? 🤣 can't even imagine her actual dad's response to that!!

I think there's a rebuttable presumption that the husband is the father.

It would be rebutted if another man was present to register the birth and declared himself the father.

There must be thousands of babies born every week to women who have left their husband and are not divorced. Not just, as in the OP's case, the time it takes but a lot of people simply cannot afford even the court fee never mind that they might need legal assistance.

Hi everyone!

This is the response I got from my local registrar's office aftwr explaining my situation. So yes, I can put my child's biological father as the father on the birth certificate.