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

hobo28

welshcakes wrote:

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?

The opposite. Not heard any reason why its a bad idea except that it worries their mum. Sorry for the confusion.

loftus

I'm entirely with hobo and bossyboots here. If you ex chooses to pursue this all the way to court he will be granted access unless there is an overwhelming reason for this not to be case. Access to both parents is the courts default position - although this may be limited contact through a contact centre to begin with until he has established a stronger relationship with the children.
Of course there is always the possibility that he has come to some sort of sense and realised he has two children that he wants to get to know.

kelloggs36

The mother has the right to make it known to the solicitor why she does not agree, whether it is taken into account in the long term or not - you must put down all the reasons why you do not think it is a good idea for your children to have contact. You may well lose, but if you don't say it, it won't be heard at all.

welshcakes

Access to both parents is the courts default position, I agree. However I think it's important to comment that where the PWC remains adamant that they find it not in the child's interests, contact granted by court order can and is regularly obstructed/ignored. Obviously this is down to the particular circumstances of the parties and what they perceive as best for the child.

My ex obtained contact. I knew it would be granted even though he had a chronic history of domestic violence that had affected the children - I threw him out the first time he directed it toward our youngest child. I allowed him to jump through all the hoops of obtaining a Contact Order, knowing that the court would issue a piece of paper at the end of it. I regret now that I intially adhered to the law, I did what I thought I had to because a judge, a Cafcass Officer etc said I had to.

From the first contact, my children were affected, intially small things only a PWC would notice. Within nine months, I stopped contact for the sake of my children's psychological wellbeing. My youngest was diagnosed as severely traumatised due to the re-introduction of his father and my daughter was refusing to go.

For me, it took nine months to realise the Contact Order was nothing more than just a piece of paper and it had almost destroyed my boy and placed massive stress on us a family unit.

I absolutely acknowledge that there are lots of stories like mine and lots of stories where contact has enriched the child's life. I would just like to say that just because the law says it's best, does not make it so. That power is ultimately down to the conscience and motives of the parents.

hobo28

Hi Welsh

Whilst I understand your position and know exactly what you are saying, a court order is simply that. An order. It is not a request. Flouting them is simply something which we should not condone on a public forum such as this.

We only ever hear one side of the story here. I'm sure the tale my ex would tell you would be very different to the way I see things.

The family law system is far from perfect but at the same time, there's no simple magic wand to wave to make it better.

Scarlett1

I cant see how its in the best interest for a 6 and 4 year old child to be forced to go to a contace centre and have a total stranger come up to them and say 'here's daddy'

Im sure though that this man will be able to show the courts that he tried everything he could in his power to see his children by ringing up his ex partner or writing to her with this request, and also sending bithday presents and cards and christmas presents and cards to show his children he cares, alas I dont think will happen and it all will all boil down to an absent parent exercising his right to see his children because he is now being forced to pay child maintenance

welshcakes

Hi hobo

Absolutely understand what you're saying.

I was going to respond that I am not condoning flouting the law, however this would be misleading and dishonest of me. I think it's important and healthy to get a spectrum of experiences on a post that deals with emotive people issues - as oppose to a straight right/wrong matter of whether one should stick to the speed limit.

As someone who doesn't even have to slow down when approaching a speed camera (that's how anally retentive I am about being law abiding where reasonably possible), I purposefully cited my experience to demonstrate that where human fators, and especially vulnerable people such as children are concerned, the law can be extremely grey and impractical and cannot always provide the right solution albeit the legally correct one.

I recognise the validity of a legal Order however would like to add that "it's only a piece of paper" was a phrase that the judge had used in his summation of the final encounter I ever had in family court. I had discounted and forgotten his words at the time however recalled and fell back onto them myself nine months later when I had no option but to flaut the law.

Perhaps someone will respond, "you did have an option" but where one is presented with the choice of watching their child withdraw into a rocking, zombie-like state of psychological isolation OR can heal them by rejecting an Order (made in good faith by the court), ultimately responsible for imposing the detriment, I cannot condone the lawful harming of a child.

I believe that many of the court officers themselves consider the law to be framed in such a way as to be unrealistic for many cases.

hobo28

Scarlett1 wrote:

I cant see how its in the best interest for a 6 and 4 year old child to be forced to go to a contace centre and have a total stranger come up to them and say 'here's daddy'

Im sure though that this man will be able to show the courts that he tried everything he could in his power to see his children by ringing up his ex partner or writing to her with this request, and also sending bithday presents and cards and christmas presents and cards to show his children he cares, alas I dont think will happen and it all will all boil down to an absent parent exercising his right to see his children because he is now being forced to pay child maintenance

But at the same time is it right that they be denied the chance to know who their real father is? Or to be prevented from the chance of having a meaningful relationship with him just because their mum doesn't want to??

I suspect if the sexes were reversed here, there'd be an outcry over the rights of the mother to see her children and not merely be reduced to a walking purse and sending the occasional letter/gift.

I'm not saying that OP should just allow him access carte blanche but I do feel she should give it some serious consideration for the children's sake and put their long term needs above her own short term insecurities and worries. Only she and those who know her will be able to know the full picture.

Scarlett1

hobo28 wrote:

But at the same time is it right that they be denied the chance to know who their real father is? Or to be prevented from the chance of having a meaningful relationship with him just because their mum doesn't want to??

I suspect if the sexes were reversed here, there'd be an outcry over the rights of the mother to see her children and not merely be reduced to a walking purse and sending the occasional letter/gift.

if a man cant show he is nothing more than a sperm doner then I dont think he deserves to wear the 'father' tag, although if he does have an attack of the conscience and wants to make up for not being in his childrens life which there is no excuse for then maybe start by writing a letter enclosing a picture of himself and take it from there, the oldest child is getting on for 7 so I cant see her accepting him with open arms even with a bribe of a macdonalds happy meal that most men spout.

loftus

I sympathise Welshcakes and recognise that there are situations where contact is not in a childs best interests. But I would argue that this is the minority situation and the childs best interests are generally served by a relationship with both parents.
I also understand that it is relatively easy for a PWC to flout a court order. I belong to another forum where there are many fathers, and a few mothers, who actively seek a relationship with their children, aren't a danger to them, pay maintenance but are still denied access, despite court orders, because of the bitterness left behind after the break-up. There is very little they can do.