Few questions regarding paternity

Hootie19

The couple were together for a very short time before the pregnancy.

They lived together for a very short time after the birth, before splitting up. Acrimoniously.

The man's name is on the child's birth certificate. The child has his surname.

The man has been voluntarily paying 10% of his income to the mother as maintenance.

It is possible that another man may be the father.



After the very acrimonious split, they then got on well together, but have once again fallen out.



The mother wants to know:

Can she double-barrell the child's name so that her surname is part of the child's name.

If so, can she do this without the man's agreement?

If so, how can this be done?

If they had a DNA test done, which showed that the other man is the father, could the birth certificate be changed ?

If the "current father" is shown not to be the father, could he make the mother repay the maintenance that he has paid to date?

clearingout

I would suggest a DNA test is essential, particularly if there is a man here paying money towards a child that might not be his.

Yes, it is possible to change the birth certificate.

If maintenance is being paid voluntarily, he can't make her repay it, no. If it's being paid through the CSA, there is a possibility that some money would have to be paid back, yes.

She can double-barrell the surname, yes. However, it seems a pointless exercise when she isn't sure who the father is. That needs sorting out before everything else, surely?

fluffnutter

Mother needs to find out who the father of her child is.

amus

I think if this woman is unsure who the father is she should not be accepting money off a man who may well be paying for a child that is not his. Thats morally bankrupt IMO.

She needs to find out who the real father is and then she can start talking about maintenance and messing around with surnames, for the sake of the child as well as the other people involved.

BitterAndTwisted

Once she's had the DNA test done and confirmed which man is the biological father she should book a spot on the Jeremy Kyle show. She sounds like ideal material for it. That poor child....

Hootie19

Thank you

The mother told the man that there was a chance that he was not the father. He has steadfastly maintained that he is, because the midwives during the pregnancy told him two or three times that the dates showed that he was the father. Plus, in his words, he "has a strong bond with the child". He does not want a DNA test.

He insisted on the child having his surname. The mother went along with it as she thought that in time, they would be married and it would be nice for them all to have the same surname.

Since then, she has asked him if he would let her double barrel the name so that she has some "connection" with the child's name, and he has refused. The mother wanted to know if she could just do this without his consent, or if his name on the birth certificate means that he can block this move.

The child is now 15 months old (dont know if that's relevant).

The mother did not ask for maintenance. The man offered and decided the amount (10% of his weekly pay).

I hardly think the above makes her "ideal material for the Jeremy Kyle show". That's a bit spiteful towards someone you don't know.

krlyr

Is the mother still in contact with the other possible father? Could she just go ahead and have the DNA test done with him - unless there's multiple potential fathers, she'll get the same answer from ruling him in or out.

I really would recommend it's done ASAP. My brother has unfortunately only just found out, just over a year down the line, that the son that his ex swore was his (similar story, date "had" to mean it was his) turned out not to be. It's upsetting for everyone involved - bar little baby of course as he doesn't know any different at that age, but it could have all been avoided by being realistic and having the test done earlier. My brother had put it off as he didn't want the argument that eventually ensued after he finally insisted on having it done but the fact that they were not 110% sure should have allowed for a DNA test to be done without it being a personal dig or anything - it's now a much huger deal and now grandparents are attached and upset, after having forked out on all this baby equipment (brother couldn't afford it all), having had littlun over every fortnight, and whatever unofficial maintenance my brother was paying. And on the other side, the real father has missed out on a year of his son's life because someone else was playing his role by mistake. My brother went to the birth, helped picked the name, has played a role in raising him for the last year and while money can be recouped, nothing can give the real father those experiences or that time back.

Hootie19

kylyr, thank you

Unfortunatley, no. She's not in touch with the other man. He has moved away from where he lived when she knew him, and the thinks he mentioned joining one of the armed forces.

The family of the birth-certificate-dad (to distinguish him from the other man) live a long way away, and have only been to visit the child once, and the father has only taken the child to visit them once, so there's no deep bond as in your situation. But I can imagine it was very distressing.

Mojisola

Hootie19 wrote: »

The mother told the man that there was a chance that he was not the father. He has steadfastly maintained that he is, because the midwives during the pregnancy told him two or three times that the dates showed that he was the father. Plus, in his words, he "has a strong bond with the child". He does not want a DNA test.

He insisted on the child having his surname. The mother went along with it as she thought that in time, they would be married and it would be nice for them all to have the same surname.

Since then, she has asked him if he would let her double barrel the name so that she has some "connection" with the child's name, and he has refused. The mother wanted to know if she could just do this without his consent, or if his name on the birth certificate means that he can block this move.

The child is now 15 months old (dont know if that's relevant).

The mother did not ask for maintenance. The man offered and decided the amount (10% of his weekly pay).

Hootie19 wrote: »

The mother wants to know:

Can she double-barrell the child's name so that her surname is part of the child's name.
If so, can she do this without the man's agreement?
If so, how can this be done?

If they had a DNA test done, which showed that the other man is the father, could the birth certificate be changed ?

If the "current father" is shown not to be the father, could he make the mother repay the maintenance that he has paid to date?

In the light of the information above -

Double-barrell the name? No, the child's name's can't be changed without the agreement of everyone with parental responsibility. As he has PR, he will have a lot of say in the child's life.

If a dna test was done and it was shown that he wasn't the father, the birth certificate could be changed. If he had been paying through the CSA, all his payments would have to be paid back. As it's a private arrangement, I don't know. Of course, she doesn't have to accept the money from the "father".

pollypenny

I don't think the comment about The JK Show is at all spiteful. You've already said that the mother is taking money from a man whom she suspects is not the father of the child.

DNA test seems essential here. Or wait until the child is about 14 and it'll probably be obvious. In Parents' Evenings teachers play 'spot the parent'.

Hootie19

I get what you're saying pollypenny, but it's not like she's taking it deceptively. She has been quite upfront about the possibility of another man being the father. The birth-certificate-father is refusing the DNA test. He won't be dissuaded from his view that the child is his.

He persuaded her that he is the father. He drew up a "joint custody agreement" after their split which detailed amount of maintenance he decided he wanted to pay.

How does that make her JK material?