Who think that fathers get the short straw when it comes to children these days. The justice system is messed up so much. There are so many Dads that want to be there for there children yet at the hands of the mothers refusing the add the fathers name to the birth certificate and refusing contact kids are growing up without fathers. :\ I think this is a pressing political issue in most countries. What do you think? Anyone who is interested I have a facebook page campaigning the issue in my sig so feel free to like the page. Rick
I think this thread would be better if you posted credible sources to back up these statements. I've never known anyone, or even heard of a woman refusing to add the name of the father to the birth certificate. Are we talking married couples, where the wife tells her husband that he can't have his name on the certificate? Oh no, I can't imagine that ever happening. If you're talking unmarried, haven't heard of that either, but could see, say if a woman is unsure who the father is, they may be reluctant to list a name. With women refusing contact with the kids, my impression is that would hardly be possible if you're the proven father. Actually, if you had to fight it, I really couldn't imagine any court that would simply refuse a father visitation rights (just because). Any mother I've ever known would want the father actively involved in the child's life unless he happened to be violent, and dangerous.
yeah need sources. I saw in some western countries as USA married women called by their husband family name. in my country women called by their own family name but anyway according to law men have upper hand.
That's true. It's the way it is in the US, when women get married it's customary to take your husband's last name as your own. Less commonly, women will keep their maiden name by hyphenating it along with their husband's last name. It's extremely rare that a woman wouldn't take her husband's last name at all. In Iran, married couples will have two different last names?
in Iran everybody known by her/his family name before and after marriage. our opposition leader is Mosavi whereas her wife family name is Rahnavard, no one call her Mrs. Mosavi.
This is probably more of a UK issue then. Sources try googling the UK Law on this it's a growing thing in the UK a fathers name does not have to be listed on the birth certificate. If they do list a fathers name on a birth certificate in the UK it gives the father parental rights to the kids so most mothers especially young mums are choosing not to list a fathers name especially to avoid having benefit cuts here in the UK you get less money from the government if your a couple than a single parent.
My wife's extremely rare then, but I already knew that. Granted I wouldnt wanna admit I know me either, she wisely managed to incorporate plausible deniability into her marriage. In the US I've seen instances where a wife elected not to have the genetic father shown on the birth certificate, but only when not married is that an option as far as I know. In the cases I've seen, a girl was impregnated out of wedlock and elected not to have a fling with a loser create a permanent attachment. If the guy wanted parental rights he should decide to marry her if that's an option they both agree to. In lieu of marriage, I'm sure he could probably sue for paternity rights, in which case he'd need to get a court to order tests to establish paternity. In the long run it is optimal for a child to have both parents, but I'm not certain marrying someone that you don't want to raise a kid with is something to do just because the cart was placed before the horse by accident. That said there are plenty of happily married couples that became married at least partially in response to unplanned pregnancy, so such an event need not be disastrous. The tongue in cheek phrase explaining that is that the first kid can come at any time, after that pregnancies take about 9 months. Stuff happens, you make the best of it, that's just life. A kid deserves two loving parents if possible, and raising a child alone is not an easy task. If the folks get together and raise the kid in a loving home, that's a win-win. Actually I'm glad to see the OP cares enough to raise the topic. The more common problem is fathers who are willing to be the sperm donor but unwilling to accept the subsequent responsibility for the continued well being of the child.
C'mon, you know you're just selfish. Why wouldn't you share your last name??! j/k I did some research. It looks like with the passage of the Welfare Reform Bill, it would actually be required to list the father's name on the birth certificate. Did you see this? Single mothers to be forced to name fathers on birth certificates. Out of the seven per cent, there are probably some women who are genuinely unsure as to who the father is, and some that are trying to keep their children safe from men that have shown themselves to be violent. Apparently, being on the birth certificate is not a guarantee of of parental rights, as the "the mother can make a legal declaration in a prescribed form to the registrar explaining that she has reasons to fear for her safety, or that of her child if the father acquired parental responsibility."
Rebecca I doubt this will be passed especially since we've had a change to government in the UK now and have a new Prime Minister. Also is a woman believes a man to be violent that's what social services are there for a father still has a right to be on the birth certificate. Also women do lie my partner for example claims I am violent and I'm not these are false allegations which some women do make granted not all do but some do. My ex partner is abusing her rights which allow her to take mine away. I believe my group DaddyZone is a much needed group for fighting for fathers rights after all every child has a right to a father yes?
I've seen it happen that a woman denies the father's rights to see the child but in all cases it has happened after they had been in a relationship for some time and then split up after things went wrong. When this happens, a court hearing is made to see who gets custody of the kids and what the visitation rights will be. At that point, it is not uncommon for a woman to invent and exaggerate "facts." This happened to a friend of mine, the ex said in court he hit her (technically true, but she forgot to mention the fact that she threw a bottle at his head a few seconds before), that he is drunk all the time, that he associates with criminals and it would put the kids in danger, etc, etc. Basically all lies. He now gets to see his kids once a month and has to pay child support, which the mother uses to get her hair done and buy expensive clothes that she wears once and throws out rather than using it to buy stuff for the kids. As for not wanting to add the father's name to the birth certificate, I could understand that if the woman made a mistake and now realizes that the father is truly violent, or simply irresponsible (drug abuser, gang member, etc) and that it would better off if he wasn't involved in the kids life. I believe that in certain cases it is better for the child to be raised by the mother alone than having a father who would bring nothing positive into the life of the child.
I disagree. By law, you don't currently have a "right" to be on the birth certificate. "...Mothers automatically have parental responsibility, as do fathers who are married to the mothers at the time of the child's birth. Unmarried fathers in the UK can acquire parental responsibility by jointly registering the birth of the child with the mother...." If I were unmarried, and involved with a man that turned out to be violent -- I would get away, far far away, wouldn't even tell him I was pregnant. Certainly wouldn't be listing his name on the birth certificate. There is 7% of women who do not list the father's name on the birth certificate in the UK. Of them, I do believe the majority probaby have valid reasons. If I had children, I certainly wouldn't rely on social services to protect them. I don't hear much about social services, except news speculating they have likely failed to accurately evaluate the risk a child was in, as with the deceased Zahra Baker. Women do? Men are definitely not an exception. Better to say, human beings can lie. If she has no evidence - no domestic dispute calls, threatening letters, testimony by witnesses, challenge it. You can take her to court. The idea that women are unwilling to accept help raising the children, seems alien to me. I'm not a single mother, but I've known many. If they don't have the benefit of a supportive extended family, it can be quite exhausting. For many, it's all about trying to be a full-time loving, nurturing mother, but often being required to work in a full-time job, keep the house clean and all that stuff. If a mother had confidence in the father, that he would treat the children well -- I can't imagine any mothers that would deny that. Why would they? It would be good for the kids, and lighten her load considerably. Every child already has a father. Beyond that, it's just a question of involvement I suppose.
If father has no rights, mother has no rights too...or you both have rights and you both should use them until you end up with what you want. Someone needs to support the kid if you don't, and whose gonna look after the kid if you don't? You shouldn't give a fuck whether she sits on her ass or not, as long as you be a good parent when you can be the kid will know what's going on and will still benefit from your love, and isn't that what matters? In Australia it starts with both parents having the same rights over their child then moves from there, as long as they're named on the birth certificate. If the mother fucks up, the father would get more rights and vice verca. I would think it would be the same there, but maybe not. Sometimes a father or mother here makes the same claim but when you read more they've usually created a scenario to deserve it. In reality they're bucking the system in place, albeit probably because it stinks or doesn't suit their plans.
Mate,you sound like a person that has had no dealings with The Australian child support system.The system was push through parliament by women for women. The system is unfair to the non custodial parent usually the father. I have my kids for one week one week off ,so I have my kids 50% of the time any I still have to pay child support to the mother even though she hasnt even got the kids in her care. It should be all about the kids but in the real world where I live,it just isnt fair....Fuck the Australian goverment .....The child support system is not working
Well not quite right, I've had 'some' dealings from the carers side, and what I stated is accurate. You're missing out on a little of the story at least. You must be earning money and fat arse's on the dole for her not to have to pay you in return. There's a reason you haven't shared with us yet. Justice is justice and it is there for all those who want it. You have recourse to pursue your problem, in the meantime, don't let the kids suffer for it because you don't want to pay for them. Your angle will just keep biting at you till you head them into the dam on fathers day. Change your attitude and you'll change your life. Get over it now and just love em while ya got em, it's really not that long in the big picture.
Not fucked up, just like getting to the point...If you think lovin them instead of arguing not to pay for them is fucked up, there's your problem!
I know of a very young woman who married a dead-beat and after their baby was born couldn't afford to get a $3 prescription filled by the chemist for her baby because dead-beat had spent it all on dope. What work he did do was mostly supplying raw materials to the gangs and getting paid in dope. She finally hit rock bottom and took off home to her folks. Dead-beat has managed to get significant access despite living a significant distance away, proven drug addiction. Initially visitation was at a "centre" where he initiated a relationship with one of the women which only ended when her ex found out and said he'd take his kids from her if they continued to be exposed to dead-beat. Nowadays he's supposed to have supervision and the first few times tried to tell his ex that the supervisor had just popped out and it was ok to leave the baby. From what I can see the courts were prepared to disregard some serious offending in favour of this infant having access to her father. Any man whose access is restricted must have behaved extremely poorly in court to come out worse off than this guy.
Sarah I'm no dead beat and there is one thing I will tell you to be very careful of and that's allegations. I am looking at supervised contact because my ex is seriously screwed in the head lived with me for two years and as soon as she pops out a baby I learn she had been living a seceret life which includes cheating on me for the whole two years without me knowing. Now she is telling social services a bunch of lies and allegations none of which she has any proof for yet people believe her. Reality is women DO lie. Not ALL men are bad. And your claim that all men who have supervised contact have it for good reason is I'm sorry to say bull crap false allegations ruin lives period and there are a lot of women out there who lie and make things up and are very good actresses when it comes to making people believe them.