Any rights of a father not named on the birth cert?

gayleygoo

A relative of mine is living with his partner of 6 years and their two young children. He isn't named as their father on either of their birth certificates, which struck me as odd since they've lived together continuously, and I didn't ask why (someone suggested it was probably for benefits reasons, but I really don't know). However I was just wondering does he have rights to his children? What would happen if something tragic happened to his partner and she was unable to care for them? If they split up could she just take them away and leave him with no right to see them?

RAS

If he is named on the birth certificate, he has automatic parental responsibility.

Without that he would have to go to court to get PR, probably requiring a DNA test.

Upside is that if she were to leave and claim CSA, he could refuse until the DNA test is done.

Dunroamin

Here's a radical idea - why doesn't he marry her?

Flugelhorn

mother cannot name baby;s father on the birth cetificate unless she is

a) married to him
b) he is present at the registration or
c) makes a statutory declaration (I think)

reason why Ed Milliband was not named on his first kid's certficate .

He can go to court and apply for parental responsibility
https://www.gov.uk/parental-rights-responsibilities/apply-for-parental-responsibility

rpc

Dunroamin wrote: »

Here's a radical idea - why doesn't he marry her?

But marriage is just a piece of paper.

I don't think that would help in this case - they were not married at the time of the birth and marriage doesn't make you automatically "adopt" any previous children that the woman has.

Is she agrees, PR can be gained by a rubber-stamp court order.

TonyMMM

rpc wrote: »

But marriage is just a piece of paper.

I don't think that would help in this case - they were not married at the time of the birth and marriage doesn't make you automatically "adopt" any previous children that the woman has.

Is she agrees, PR can be gained by a rubber-stamp court order.

He doesn't need to adopt them if they are his children (and can't anyway).

If a couple have children together and then marry afterwards - they are required by law to re-register those children (Sec 14, Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 & Sec 9 Legitimacy Act 1976).

The father's name would then be added to the birth certificate and he would acquire Parental Responsibility.

Alternatively, they can just apply to re-register the births without being married, but he will need to attend with the mother, or complete the necessary Statutory Declarations (in which case the re-registration is under Sec 10a of the Births & Deaths Registration Act 1953)..

candlelight_2013

Exactly as Tony MMM says.

Tony I retired as a RBD, 8 years ago, it is good to know some things haven't changed. lol

Candlelight

Mojisola

RAS wrote: »

Upside is that if she were to leave and claim CSA, he could refuse until the DNA test is done.

If the test proved that he was the father, he would have to pay arrears back to the start of the claim as well as the cost of the DNA test.

DigForVictory

I thnk OP would like her relative to formalise the arrangement for the children's safety & wellbeing, rather than peg his wallet out for the magistrates.

Dunroamin

rpc wrote: »

But marriage is just a piece of paper.

I don't think that would help in this case - they were not married at the time of the birth and marriage doesn't make you automatically "adopt" any previous children that the woman has.

Is she agrees, PR can be gained by a rubber-stamp court order.

No it isn't. Marriage is an important legal contract protecting the rights of both people as partners and as parents.

JJWSJS8700

RAS wrote: »

If he is named on the birth certificate, he has automatic parental responsibility.



Only previous to 2003 before then even if the fathers name was on the BC there was still no Parental Responsibility.