What rights does a unmarried father who is NOT on birth certificate have?AdvicePlease

Scarlett1

karen if you feel your ex being involved in you childrens life is not beneficial to them then tell the solicitor that, I can imagine how hard it is going to be for them for a stranger to come into their life just because he can and not because he wants too, if they have regarded your partner as their daddy then this man is not in their best interest as if he was he would have shown his face much earlier than this and fought for his children.

chin up, be strong

Karen1980

WE are going to town to make a appointment at the solistors. Thank you everyone I needed telling!!!

welshcakes

With regards to maintenance payments impacting on an unmarried father's rights of acquiring Parental Responsibility

PROs (Parental Responsibility Order) originate under Section 4 of the Children Act 1989 The 'Paramountcy Principle' applies - i.e. the welfare of the child is paramount in considering whether to award a PRO. The criteria which a father must meet in order to be given PR are not stipulated. However, over the past few years a substantial body of case law has developed which addresses this matter. The watershed case (1) included the following criteria to be considered when an application for a PRO was before the court:

the degree of commitment which the father has shown towards the child e.g.
financial support
pursuing contact
keeping arrangements
present at birth
having ones name on the birth certificate
involvement in child's education
the degree of attachment existing between the father and the child (naturally a father of a very young child may have had little opportunity to develop this)
the reasons for the father's application (to weed out applications made solely to be obstructive or disruptive)


Asking to write to them alone is not sufficient grounds for a PRO (Parental Responsibility Order) however, where he is also paying maintenance, granting of PR is far more compelling.

Also, a similar query came up on another recent thread about changing children's names without father's consent. where maintenance was paid, the father was viewed as having PR (however, I shall check to see whether this is after the 31.12.2003 amendment date)

Scarlett1

Bossyboots wrote:

The worrying thing is that Karen is ignoring the letters. Mediation may well not be the best route for her but ignoring the situation definitely is not. It is this aspect that will look bad, rather than not wanting to attend mediation for valid reasons.

would she be able to write back to this solicitor stating why its not a good idea for her ex to suddenly appear in the childrens life, or wont it matter because he is the biological father so he would get access no matter what ?

welshcakes

The fickle thing about contact orders is that whilst they are theoretically enforceable, in real terms many PWC, for whatever reasons, do not comply with no consequence. The court has the power to fine or imprison the PWC for continually and evidentally refusing to comply with an Order however I have no recollection of any UK case where either of these has happened.

Courts will not fine the average PWC as it financially penalises the family and to send a PWC to prison would be viewed as completely against the interests of the child.

specs_3

Scarlett1 wrote:

would she be able to write back to this solicitor stating why its not a good idea for her ex to suddenly appear in the childrens life, or wont it matter because he is the biological father so he would get access no matter what ?

Scarlett1,

There would have to be an extremely good reason for the father not to be granted a Parental responsibility order and a contact order.

I have not heard anything that would lead me to believe that in this case it would not be granted.
The amount of contact is impossible to 2nd guess.

emmaBZ

Bossyboots wrote:

This is totally incorrect. See the post by emmaBZ

However, on that issue



Please don't follow the advice here. The courts see parents every day claiming to be "protecting" their children. Ignoring the solicitors will simply kick start proceedings. Chances are the ex will be entitled to legal aid so no costs implications to worry about.

You must go and see a solicitor to get your own advice. You may well qualify for legal aid (and I can give you a better idea if you listed your income and rent/mortgage payments). On this thread you have been given some well meaning but inaccurate advice. Go to see someone with whom you can talk everything through and who can reply to the letter for you.

hi just to clarify i wasn't saying to ignore the letters from the solicitor, i was suggesting writing back and saying your not happy about this ect and if it was pursued and he was still pushing for this then to contact a solicitor, ( as i said in my previous post you can sometimes get a free consultation )
also if it does go to court then its not necessarily something to worry about, just be prepared to go and fight for what you believe is right for your kids, ( and dont be afraid to tell your ex you will fight him all the way ! )if he pushes it and it goes to court, as has been mentioned before the court do whats best for the kids and you need to be prepared for any outcome

hobo28

Parental Responsibility generally is given. I've known a case where a father was granted PR but denied contact because of his conviction for sexual offences. Go figure that one out!?!?!

The best thing to do is to try and avoid court. If all he's asking for is to send a few letters I'd seriously consider that. Court is not nice for anyone and if you don't qualify for legal aid, gets VERY expensive.

Telling your solicitor some of the stuff suggested here like "...your ex being involved in you childrens life is not beneficial to them" is quite frankly a complete waste of time. My partner's ex was a drug addict and she was threatened with contempt of court for saying it. The only thing that saved her was he went on a bender and disappeared until one day he saw sense!

As bossy has said, your wishes etc. don't matter if it gets to court. All that matters is what is in the best interests of the children. In the current climate, thats quite likely to be seen as having some contact with their natural father. The only question is how much.

Quite frankly so far, I haven't heard a single reason why its not in the best interests of the child not to have contact with their father.

welshcakes

hobo28 wrote:

Quite frankly so far, I haven't heard a single reason why its not in the best interests of the child not to have contact with their father.

Triple negative, sorry I don't want to misunderstand, are you saying you haven't heard any reason why it is in the best interests for the children to see their father?

welshcakes

Just to add, from the dates you have given karen, the children are roughly 6 and 4 yrs of age and the dad left in 2001/2002 so the eldest will have almost no recollection.

I would offer up what I as a mum would find a valid reason for concern over contact; emotional disruption. Are your children aware that your partner is not their biological dad and have you sat down and had conversations with them about their real dad? All these things are real factors.