Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Lone parents

Use our Single Parent forum to speak to other parents raising a child alone.

if you leave father off birth certificate does it make you look unreasonable?

36 replies

newlyseparated · 16/05/2022 15:44

The father is not a nice person, has been emotionally abusive to me, but he is the father and he will definitely take it to court to get added (he's an obsessive type of person who won't just get bored and not bother). Pretty sure he will also go to court wanting joint residence eventually which I do not at all want. So just wondering if it would come back to bite me if I don't put him on birth certificate - if he goes to court for residence do I look a bit unreasonable not putting him on there when he will get added anyway? My family think I might as well just put him on. Would be keen to know if anyone ever had this situation come back to bite them in the future?
Thanks

OP posts:
PartyGoose · 16/05/2022 15:45

You can't put him on unless he's there to register the birth, unless you're married. Will he be there for the registration?

LetitiaLeghorn · 16/05/2022 15:48

I guess it depends what you're hoping to achieve by leaving him off? Personally, as a child, I'd hate to have a gap where my father's name should be as if my mother didn't know who he was.

Vsirbdo · 16/05/2022 15:53

It depends why you want to leave him off.
I’d be tempted to leave him off to buy a bit of time; once he’s on there he can take the baby and without a court order you can’t have the baby returned to you. If he’s that much of a horrible person that you think he could do that then when he goes to court about the parental responsibility I’d also make sure a court order is in place about contact

PeekAtYou · 16/05/2022 16:36

Are you married to him? If you are then it's presumed he's the father.

If you're not then he needs to attend the naming appointment in order to be added to the birth certificate.

PeekAtYou · 16/05/2022 16:41

Is he likely to kick off about the name? A lot of these kinds of men seem to love insisting that their surname is used so if you go on your own you won't have that battle to worry about.

MakeThingsRight · 16/05/2022 16:42

If he's willing to go to court to be put on then you may as well add him when he goes with you.

Are you living together?

MakeThingsRight · 16/05/2022 16:44

Also assuming baby is only a few weeks old, then joint residency is way off.

Is there a recorded history of abuse? Maybe with the police or similar?

MolkosTeenageAngst · 16/05/2022 16:45

If he’s emotionally abusive then considering you can’t add him to the birth certificate without him attending when you register the birth I think you would be reasonable to leave him off. If anybody asks you can explain that in light of his abusive behaviour you didn’t feel comfortable inviting him to attend with you as you didn’t want to see him or give him an opportunity to be abusive.

Tdcp · 16/05/2022 16:51

Given that you describe him as being abusive etc I wouldn't tell him when you're going to register the baby and then he can't go on it anyway, later on you could always say you didn't realise he had to be there so you went alone etc.

On another note though, whilst I agree with not putting your child in harms way by naming the father on the certificate so he can claim custody etc, my mother didn't put my father on the birth certificate and it really bothered me. I would just be prepared to be open and honest about him to your child in the future as not knowing anything about mine did affect me. I couldn't even google him as I didn't know his name. I found him in the end and yeah I'm not interested in having a relationship with him though. If you can get my point through the ramble (sorry I'm at work! 😂)

ChoiceMummy · 16/05/2022 18:22

newlyseparated · 16/05/2022 15:44

The father is not a nice person, has been emotionally abusive to me, but he is the father and he will definitely take it to court to get added (he's an obsessive type of person who won't just get bored and not bother). Pretty sure he will also go to court wanting joint residence eventually which I do not at all want. So just wondering if it would come back to bite me if I don't put him on birth certificate - if he goes to court for residence do I look a bit unreasonable not putting him on there when he will get added anyway? My family think I might as well just put him on. Would be keen to know if anyone ever had this situation come back to bite them in the future?
Thanks

Not putting on bc is what the government did to protect women and babies of unmarried women. It means that if he has. contact with the child, which he can do without being on the bc, then the police would return the child whereas of on bc they haven't without a court order got any rights to request this and at best do a welfare check whilst you go to court for an emergency order, that can take a week.

Not being on bc doesn't stop you claiming maintenance either.

It's your safeguard. He may well go to court, a court won't view this as unreasonable of you and or him. When he requests to be added, you request his surname is added as a middle name or worst case as a surname without a hyphen as then you can drop this legally.

You'd also request an order that the child lives with you and that you can take out of the country for 28 days without his permission.

He could get awarded 5050 but not until older and he needs overnights first which won't happen until 18 to 24 months old.

Neverreturntoathread · 16/05/2022 18:27

It makes you look brave enough to go it alone and prepared to potentially sacrifice the right to child maintenance in exchange for protecting your child from an unsafe adult having the power over you both of parental responsibility. That’s how I would perceive it.

fluffycereal · 16/05/2022 18:30

Do you care if it looks unreasonable? You do what you think is right for you and your child. What anyone thinks is irrelevant. If he takes it to court then so be it, but there is a huge chance he won't.

breatheintheamazing · 16/05/2022 18:45

It's difficult but to me they are a legal document. You presumably chose to have a baby with the man. I agree with a previous poster I'd hate there to be a gap where my fathers name was like he was some nameless one night stand. Presumably you also want child maintenance so to me the two go hand in hand

bbqhulahoop · 16/05/2022 18:46

You can get child maintenance without him on the birth certificate. If he does take you to court he would be added but that dsnt change baby's registered surname. If he does take you to court and get added he might eventually get 50/50 but that's a long way off so try to take things one bit at a time

fluffycereal · 16/05/2022 18:58

@breatheintheamazing

It's difficult but to me they are a legal document.

Yes they are, and not naming the abusive man is a positive step to protecting a child.

You presumably chose to have a baby with the man. I agree with a previous poster I'd hate there to be a gap where my fathers name was like he was some nameless one night stand.

You would rather have forced contact with an abusive man than a gap on your birth certificate? Now that's just plain weird.

Presumably you also want child maintenance so to me the two go hand in hand

No, they do not.

fluffycereal · 16/05/2022 18:58

Urgh the spaces were there when I posted Angry

SpringtimeDandelions · 16/05/2022 19:21

Buy yourself as much time as possible.
Document the abuse if you can, whether through contact with Women’s Aid, GP or via the non emergency police line if ongoing - get a crime number and you can add to it. And keep your own diary/log.

If you put him on now, that means you have to go with him to register the birth at a time when you should be minimising your stress. And then he would be on the certificate with no safeguards in place. (This is all assuming you aren’t married.)

If wait for him to apply, the first step would be an initial mediation meeting as individuals, with a view to joint mediation if appropriate. One outcome is that you both attend mediation and reach a resolution.

Another outcome is that mediation is unsuccessful, or deemed unsuitable (you should only agree to do it if you feel safe in his presence and confident you can get your points across without feeling intimidated) it progresses to court.

At court, it is overwhelmingly likely he would be granted parental responsibility but the particulars could be hashed out via a child arrangements order. This can minimise the amount of control he is able to have, and if you are named as the resident parent it also means you can take child abroad for up to a month without his permission. (A Child Arrangements Order can also sometimes be agreed in mediation and then taken to a judge to sign.)

I do encourage you to seek legal advice from a solicitor with experience in handling domestic abuse. If they seem too timid, consider a second opinion. Also contact Rights of Women and Women’s Aid.

At court/mediation you could state you are not fundamentally opposed to him being added but wanted to have safeguarding discussions and a thorough framework given the history of abuse. A solicitor can give help you with the best line to take.

People who say it is not fair on the child to leave the father off the birth certificate often do not appreciate the ramifications on both mother and baby of an abuser having instant equal legal rights. As for seeing a blank where the father’s name is:
1)You can apply for a “short form” certificate which is fairly useless for most things but has the benefit of not naming either parent.
2) If you are not concealing the identity of the father from the child, I.e. they always know his name, and not blocking them from adding their father later at their own choice, I think not initially putting the father on the certificate is by far the better option in this specific type of imperfect situation.

There’s a small chance he may not bother applying - you might be surprised. It may suit him better to choose to see himself as a victim who has been blocked from his child, rather than taking initiative/effort. But if he does apply, you have meanwhile bought yourself some time and are allowing a better framework for arranging particulars before the parental responsibility is granted.

You can also re-register the birth at any time to include him, even without a court order.

Don’t expect great things from court/cafcass but it’s your best bet.

All the best, and good luck to you.

SpringtimeDandelions · 16/05/2022 19:25

Sorry for bad grammar above but I hope everything is clear.

Also, in case you don’t know, it’s a common misconception that parental responsibility is a prerequisite for paying maintenance. This is not the case. The other parent has a legal duty to pay child maintenance regardless of whether or not they are on the birth certificate, and regardless of whether or not they have contact with the child.

RoseAndRose · 16/05/2022 19:38

Not putting on bc is what the government did to protect women and babies of unmarried women

It wasn't 'done' by the government for those reasons, though it does pretty much have that effect.

Those on the BC have automatic and equal parental rights (changed in early 2000s?) which was designed to simply matters for unmarried couples. But f not married the father must attend the registration (or if impossible such as imprisonment, military service, serious illness etc then a statutory declaration is needed). That is to stop pesky lying women naming unconnected men as fathers.

If a woman is married, the law assumes the child is the husband's (unless repudiated). So a married man can register his wife's child without her being present. An unmarried man cannot register a child without the mother present

FloydPepper · 16/05/2022 19:45

I’m out of step with the majority view on here.

I think a father should be on the BC. I do t think it should be used as a weapon, or he should be left off because the mum doesn’t like him, or he had a affair, or yes even if he’s abusive. I think it should be treated as a statement of fact.

you’ll get lots of advice as to how you can use the BC to delay his parental responsibilities. It’s deemed acceptable on here.

but like I say, I know I’m out of step on this one

SpringtimeDandelions · 16/05/2022 19:53

@FloydPepper I completely see that point of view. Before the law changed on 1st Dec 2003 it was just that: a statement of fact. I wish there were still that option for cases like this.

Having seen the horrendous reality time and time again when abusers seek to wreak havoc by exploiting these automatic equal rights which being named on the birth certificate now gives them, I feel I can’t recommend it to women who are being abused by the father, especially when the perpetrator would usually need to be present with the mother at the registration too, providing a further opportunity to abuse.

fluffycereal · 16/05/2022 19:53

FloydPepper · 16/05/2022 19:45

I’m out of step with the majority view on here.

I think a father should be on the BC. I do t think it should be used as a weapon, or he should be left off because the mum doesn’t like him, or he had a affair, or yes even if he’s abusive. I think it should be treated as a statement of fact.

you’ll get lots of advice as to how you can use the BC to delay his parental responsibilities. It’s deemed acceptable on here.

but like I say, I know I’m out of step on this one

It isn't just a statement of fact though, is it?

I think this attitude towards leaving a man off a BC comes from ignorance. Be glad to be ignorant of such things.

RagzRebooted · 16/05/2022 19:56

LetitiaLeghorn · 16/05/2022 15:48

I guess it depends what you're hoping to achieve by leaving him off? Personally, as a child, I'd hate to have a gap where my father's name should be as if my mother didn't know who he was.

It says 'unknown' on the Father section on mine. Which is shit as he isn't unknown at all and it's always bothered me. I'd rather it was just blank!
Did it because he didn't want to be named so DM couldn't chase him for maintenance (he never lived with us but I always knew who he was, visited once a year if that).

MakeThingsRight · 16/05/2022 19:56

My son is going through the exact same situation at the moment. Of course he should be on the BC. He is the baby's father.

In my case, what the mother (and her mother) claim are very inconsistent with their actions. So although it is very easy to say emotionally abusive and deprive a man of his much loved child, it does not mean it is so.

Hence why I asked about involvement from police, and now I shall add CS.

You can't condemn a parent on one word from the other parent. Every child has a right to know it's full parentage and further.

I would never, ever make light of emotional, coercive or physical abuse having lived it with my ex.

However, I am now seeing a teenager potentially ruining my son's chance to be a father.

fluffycereal · 16/05/2022 19:57

MakeThingsRight · 16/05/2022 19:56

My son is going through the exact same situation at the moment. Of course he should be on the BC. He is the baby's father.

In my case, what the mother (and her mother) claim are very inconsistent with their actions. So although it is very easy to say emotionally abusive and deprive a man of his much loved child, it does not mean it is so.

Hence why I asked about involvement from police, and now I shall add CS.

You can't condemn a parent on one word from the other parent. Every child has a right to know it's full parentage and further.

I would never, ever make light of emotional, coercive or physical abuse having lived it with my ex.

However, I am now seeing a teenager potentially ruining my son's chance to be a father.

Well

Perhaps if your son didn't get a teenager pregnant he wouldn't be in this predicament

Swipe left for the next trending thread