nrp help

Wasteland_Drifter

Zara33 wrote: »

An unmarried father who jointly signs the birth register with the mother from 1st December 2003 now has Parental Responsibility. This does not apply to children born before the legislation was passed, although it is a common misconception.

Thank you for clearing that up.

Loopy Girl, I am reading your other theads and I see this is not the first time you have started a flame war on these forums. I think you need to gracefully accept you made an error of fact and creating a rather large amount of mess on this thread.

Wasteland_Drifter

Zara33 wrote: »

Hey disagrement and discussion is fine, however personal attacks are a little low.

Not a personal attack, an opinion based on fact. It looks like I am being accused of making a statement on these forums for which there is no evidence. Making unsubstantiated remarks directed at me is below.

Wasteland_Drifter

stokefan wrote: »

im on the birth cert andthe child was born in 2008, so where do i stand?? confused now

I will now suggest you seek professional advice, but my original post on this thread regarding your legal position stands.

Zara33

ho hum...........

Zara33

Wasteland_Drifter wrote: »

Not a personal attack, an opinion based on fact. It looks like I am being accused of making a statement on these forums for which there is no evidence. Making unsubstantiated remarks directed at me is below.

Our Loopy Girl is a fiesty little minx

mitchaa

Wasteland_Drifter wrote: »

Thank you Zara33. Its Section 2(4) of the Children Act 1989

Stokefan, your name on the birth certificate makes no impact. You are the biological father and you have parental responsibility. If you were not married to your childs mother when he was born then you do not have parental rights unless legally adopt him.

Wasteland drifter...In defence of loopy girl, you did post the above. I have my fair share of battles with LG but i will defend her on this 1.

She was right, you were wrong.

You categorically told the O.P he had no rights what so ever, you can't be doing that fella.

Loopy_Girl

Wasteland_Drifter wrote: »

Not a personal attack

An opinion based on fact from a few comments on an internet site and you have decided that 'I am not all there'?

Your screen name seems very apt and I think the months on JSA have made you forget how to be courtous. I've reported your comment.

mitchaa

Wasteland_Drifter wrote: »

I will now suggest you seek professional advice, but my original post on this thread regarding your legal position stands.

I take it with that view point you have completely disregarded the 2003 act

Why?

Loopy_Girl

mitchaa wrote: »

Wasteland drifter...In defence of loopy girl, you did post the above. I have my fair share of battles with LG but i will defend her on this 1.

She was right, you were wrong.

You categorically told the O.P he had no rights what so ever, you can't be doing that fella.

Mitchaa, Zara has been pasting bits of information left right and centre and he bizarrely thanks her for the posts even when they are contradicting what he is saying.

He'll not be told. Just like when he argued that the CSA couldn't impose a Penalty Assessment (which he clearly didn't know what it was) without a 'fair trial'.

The OP has plenty rights as he is named on the certificate and the baby was born after 2003.

Loopy_Girl

Wasteland_Drifter wrote: »

Loopy Girl, I am reading your other theads and I see this is not the first time you have started a flame war on these forums.

And your point is? why should it concern you what I do previous?

You are wrong. Get it into your head that Parental Rights and Responsibilites are the same thing hence why they are referred to PRR.