Can anyone advise on this horrible scenario please. Update.

TBagpuss

A court has to make decision based on what is in the best interests of the child, and therehave been previous cases where a step-father has been sucessful - https://knyvet.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/867.html is one such. There was also a case where a lesbian couple had a child  and the court recognised that the 2nd Mum, who had no biological relationship tto the child (and I think they were either not married or fell outside the rules about childnre conceived via IVF) was decribed as a 'pychological' parent.

he may find it harder to get full residence but the court can madke an order for shared care, defining what time the childnre spend with him and with their mum and can grant him PR. 

Given her habit of dumping the childnre on him he may find that she changes her postion once the impact of having to actually parent them herself kicks in. 

smudge56

He has parental responsibility as he is named on the birth certificate. Even if the mother gets his name removed from the birth certificate, only a court can remove the parental responsibility 

T.T.D

One must remind our self this one side of a complex situation coming in third hand. 

To me the signing of the name to the birth certificate whilst her knowing he is not the dad is beneficial in his case. 

She chose your Nieces boyfriend to be the dad for security, she decided he was a good suitor and choice for this kid to be with him, had the other father been more beneficial to her she would have come clean and shipped him out. 

It also shows poor judgment and poor decision making on the children’s behalf, she hid a secret till such time it became beneficial or too real (the court is all too familiar to this type of person) this shows she is manipulative and a liar for her own beneficial interests. 

So she’s not off to a good start in the process so far.

The court and Cafcass may want to seek the biological dad’s identity and approach him if the mum wants to drop names. As for all we know she used that pregnancy as weapon against him in a way to back him off her “I’m pregnant with my new man so get lost”, he may actually have no idea about this child being his and has been deprived of a family life by her selfish needs and wants and manipulations. 

The court and Cafcass may wish to pursue a unification for the child rather than hand full or even partial access to Neices Boyfriend, they may go down a path of reducing any access with him and slowly increasing the access for the child with his Bio dad with a view to potentially granting the bio dad full custody.

IF THE BIO DAD WANTS THIS that’s is. 

He may have children and a wife a stable home a good job the perfect trifecta, the court then may release the nieces boyfriend from the birth certificate and withdraw his parental responsibilities, this would be best scenario for that child from a courts perspective and then support the bio dad and child in their unification.  

If the Bio dad doesn’t want the child or access to him or cannot for legal reasons, then in my opinion the court then start looking at your nieces boyfriend for suitability, how strong is there a bond, is there stability etc. 

Then it doesn’t stop there Cafcass can make all kinds of demands of him to jump through hoops and assessments and it can feel and can be quite invasive and demanding process while fending off his ex and her accusations.

nyermen

Sympathies to the innocent parties here.  I just had my parents fighting over me and my brother many years ago, puts things into perspective.

Side observation - at what point did the mother become aware I wonder.  Had she suspected at birth and then tested, and so known for years, or suspected and decided to test recently herself.  Don't suppose it would change the court outcome, but it might indicate the level of manipulation.

gizmo111

T.T.D said:

One must remind our self this one side of a complex situation coming in third hand. 

To me the signing of the name to the birth certificate whilst her knowing he is not the dad is beneficial in his case. 

She chose your Nieces boyfriend to be the dad for security, she decided he was a good suitor and choice for this kid to be with him, had the other father been more beneficial to her she would have come clean and shipped him out. 

It also shows poor judgment and poor decision making on the children’s behalf, she hid a secret till such time it became beneficial or too real (the court is all too familiar to this type of person) this shows she is manipulative and a liar for her own beneficial interests. 

So she’s not off to a good start in the process so far.

The court and Cafcass may want to seek the biological dad’s identity and approach him if the mum wants to drop names. As for all we know she used that pregnancy as weapon against him in a way to back him off her “I’m pregnant with my new man so get lost”, he may actually have no idea about this child being his and has been deprived of a family life by her selfish needs and wants and manipulations. 

The court and Cafcass may wish to pursue a unification for the child rather than hand full or even partial access to Neices Boyfriend, they may go down a path of reducing any access with him and slowly increasing the access for the child with his Bio dad with a view to potentially granting the bio dad full custody.

IF THE BIO DAD WANTS THIS that’s is. 

He may have children and a wife a stable home a good job the perfect trifecta, the court then may release the nieces boyfriend from the birth certificate and withdraw his parental responsibilities, this would be best scenario for that child from a courts perspective and then support the bio dad and child in their unification.  

If the Bio dad doesn’t want the child or access to him or cannot for legal reasons, then in my opinion the court then start looking at your nieces boyfriend for suitability, how strong is there a bond, is there stability etc. 

Then it doesn’t stop there Cafcass can make all kinds of demands of him to jump through hoops and assessments and it can feel and can be quite invasive and demanding process while fending off his ex and her accusations.

At the end of the day the nephew is not this child's father, once Mum applies to the court with the DNA evidence to remove his name from the birth cert then he has no legal connection to the child.  He then becomes just an ex-partner and has no rights, court will not order that he has contact, any agreement to see him will be at the goodwill of the mum.  
Neither Cafcass or the court will go searching for the childs actual father, if the local authority become involved in care proceedings and Mum names him, then the LA may go looking for him dependent on other factors. 

swingaloo

Update- He has seen a solicitor who specialises in family law. Apparently  this scenario is a lot more common than you would think.

The solicitor told him that he has every chance of still being successful in getting custody. He said that if the child was under 12 months then it would be very different but as there is a 7 year bond things are a bit more positive. The fact that there is a second child (which is def his) adds to the mix in a positive way.

I will keep the thread updated. Thank you for the responses. 

swingaloo

TonyMMM said:

swingaloo said:

theoretica said:

Is he named on the child's birth certificate? 

Yes he is.

Then he has full parental responsibility for the child until such time as a court decides otherwise.

Things are going from bad to worse. His name was on the birth certificate but has now been taken off by the mother. Apparently with a DNA test now showing he is not the biological father she had a right to take his name off. 

Even the solicitor is giving him a very bleak prospect of being able to have future contact with the child now. 

smudge56

Even with the name being removed from the birth certificate he still has parental responsibility until a court removes it.  The child’s name cannot be changed without his permission also.
https://www.magdalenchambers.co.uk/parental-responsibility-and-declarations-of-non-parentage-a-non-biological-father-named-on-a-clilds-birth-certificate/#:~:text=A%20person%20can%20only%20lose,t%20lose%20his%20parental%20responsibility.

TonyMMM

swingaloo said:

TonyMMM said:

swingaloo said:

theoretica said:

Is he named on the child's birth certificate? 

Yes he is.

Then he has full parental responsibility for the child until such time as a court decides otherwise.

Things are going from bad to worse. His name was on the birth certificate but has now been taken off by the mother. Apparently with a DNA test now showing he is not the biological father she had a right to take his name off. 

Even the solicitor is giving him a very bleak prospect of being able to have future contact with the child now. 

Removing a father from a birth entry is not a simple process - the mother would have to make a sworn statutory declaration but it would have to be accompanied by "documentary evidence of a finding of a court that the person named in the entry as the father was not the father" .

So either someone isn't telling the truth or she has been to court to get the relevant order ( in which case he should have been notified about the proceedings).

Have you actually checked with the registration office and seen a newly issued certificate ?