Dom Violence Married man

[Fadeaway]

The state I was in a father can legally take the child and disappear if his name is on the birthcertificate. Both parents have equal rights until it is changed in court. If one parent disappears with the child you can go to court and get emergency orders and then after so much time the other parent can be charged with kidnapping, but by that time they can easily get the child out of the country.

Not all states have the same rule.

 

[leslie82]

Absolutely not true in my state, not at all. I'm in the middle of my own custody battle and have spoke...

I know the difference. I've been on many legal forums and have seen many posts about it. Legally the OP does NOT have to allow him to see the child until he has a visitation order. Legally he has NO rights to the child until he goes to court and establishes them. Being on the birth certificate is one step that helps. My point is that right now he has no power over her or that kid because she doesn't have anything that states she has to let him see the kid. I very highly doubt he's going to fight it unless his wife has left him.

He will be the presumed father until proven otherwise. He will be seen as legally the father - but a birth certificate does not grant rights. It does not grant the right to visitation. ONLY a court can do that. That's my point. Until a court establishes it there is no child support order and no right to visitation.

Legal Significance of Paternity - FindLaw

The state I was in a father can legally take the child and disappear if his name is on the birthcertif...

That cannot be true because if an unmarried male has not established his paternity in court and has no custody nor visitation then that's kidnapping.

You are wrong. UNMARRIED males have no legal rights until they establish them. IF this man had been married to the OP then they have equal rights. Unmarried mothers have 100% of the rights to their child because it's pretty well assumed that the mother is the mother since she gave birth. Unmarried males - no. Look it up.

What Are a Father's Rights If Not Married - Here's What to Know

https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/putative.pdf

"With some variation in language, the term "putative father" generally means a man whose legal relationship to a child has not been established but who is alleged to be or claims that he may be the biological father of a child who is born to a woman to whom he is not married at the time of the child’s birth."

I have yet to find any state that says that an unmarried male who hasn't established his paternity in court can take a child out of state. Unmarried males don't have any rights. They are either the presumed father or the putative father if they are on the birth certificate. That's because anyone can put any name on the birth certificate. That doesn't make the guy the father. That's why they allow time to rebut that if the man thinks he's not the father.

I don't know what states you guys live in or what lawyers the first person talked to but that's not the case from the lawyers (across the US) who I've talked to on forums and even when I talked to my lawyer in my divorce.

 

[Casey_03]

@leslie82 I'm really not interested in getting into an argument about it, and as I said, it may be different depending on the state. But I would warn the OP or anyone reading this thread to consult a lawyer in their state about this -- because where I am, a family court judge, court advocate, and two different lawyers have said refusing visitation to the father, if he is listed on the birth certificate, can be used against the mother in any subsequent custody battles, and it can give the father MORE visitation than her. That's literally the first thing the court advocates said: "If he is on the birth certificate, denying him visitation is the worst thing you can do." That is the first question asked by lawyers and advocates - "Is he on the birth certificate?" Because if he is, that changes everything.

That doesn't come from a legal forum or website, but straight from the horse's mouth. So, again, maybe it's different depending on the state - I don't know. But any woman in the midst of a custody battle should speak directly to a lawyer herself before blocking visitation. Because she may end up shooting herself in the foot if she listens to this advice.

***It's also important to note that the website you linked to is not the website of an actual lawyer, but the equivalent of Wikipedia - anyone can post general information, that doesn't make it accurate. There is even a disclaimer at the very end stressing that the information listed "does not constitute legal advice."

I'm also confused about this idea that you can just put any man's name on the birth certificate on your own. I've never heard of that -- both where I am now, and where the baby was born before, you needed the man's signature if you put his name on the certificate. And if he wasn't there to sign, you'd need a notarized form with his signature on it. So his consent was required. Again, maybe this is just an issue of different jurisdictions, but in my experience it isn't possible to just list a name without the person providing his consent.

 

[leslie82]

"Could be" used against the mother. That's not the same as stating he has visitation RIGHTS. Because unmarried males have NO rights until they go to court!! I very highly doubt the judge is going to use that against her once finding out this was an affair and the guy is abusive.

Yeah and the forums I go to have the same disclaimer BUT they have actual lawyers on them. EVERY single post I searched on this came up the same. UNMARRIED MEN have NO legal rights. IF they are on the birth certificate that solely makes them the putative father. That does not grant them rights to visitation or puts a child support order in place as only a court can do that. AND some men have no visitation but still pay child support.

Nothing you said from those lawyer said that being on the birth certificate gave the man rights. It just was advised to not with hold visitation because it "might" be bad later. Nothing about rights. If you look at the other post I made I posted .gov links that stated exactly what I've told you. Being on the birth certificate does not grant anyone RIGHTS. It only makes them the father legally - but only the court can grant them visitation and child support orders. SO the OP has absolutely NO obligation and I believe I told her to talk to a lawyer. But she need not let him threaten her with the kid because he has NO RIGHTS to threaten her with. If she wanted to, she could up and disappear with the kid and not tell him ever.

I'll give you another example - my mom had an affair while married to my dad. My youngest brother is the result of that affair. However she was married to my dad so he automatically is the father because any married woman who has a child while married her HUSBAND will automatically be the father and have rights unless it's disputed. My mom even ended up marrying this guy after she left my dad - but he never disputed it. They had a paternity test done - and they couldn't even change my brother's last name with that. My father is still and always was the legal father of my brother and has had all rights and his biological father has had no legal rights to him. If my mom would have divorced him while my brother was a minor - his biological father never could have gotten visitation or custody because legally he never has been or is he the father.

I'm also confused about this idea that you can just put any man's name on the birth certificate on you...

Why can't you put any man's name on the birth certificate? If you "think" someone is the father but aren't sure you can put them down unless you're married. IF you are married and you give birth your husband is automatically listed and is legally the father and has equal rights unless it's disputed - generally within 90 days in most states. If a guy thinks he's the dad he is likely going to sign it.

I was married to my ex husband when my daughter was born. Guess who was the only person who signed it? Me. He didn't have to sign it. I signed it. He is listed. But he never had to sign it.

 

[Fadeaway]

For the sake of the OP and so I don't get banned from this site, I am just going to say...yup your right, my personal experience experience of others is totally not valid. I'll just ignore my own experiences with the court and totally for get that that the welfare office makes you add a father before any assistance can be given and with nothing more than that, they can go after him for child support.

 

[Casey_03]

Why can't you put any man's name on the birth certificate? If you "think" someone is the father but aren't sure you can put them down unless you're married.

When I was in the process of getting my son's birth certificate, this was actually prohibited -- they said it was not allowed to just put a man's name down without his signature or some proof that he consented to being the father.

Nothing you said from those lawyer said that being on the birth certificate gave the man rights. It just was advised to not with hold visitation because it "might" be bad later. Nothing about rights.

A family court judge told me explicitly that if a man is on the birth certificate, he does have paternal rights. The lawyers said that as well. I stressed that it could be used against the woman in court, because that seems like the most serious point here -- if you deny him his rights, it could be used against you later in court. And if a judge who actually issues rulings in these cases said a man on the birth certificate has rights, I'd take him at his word -- because he's the one making the final judgment in custody cases.

The .gov link you posted is state statutes through 2014. Perhaps the legal definition of paternal rights has changed since then, but where I am it is definitely not accurate to say a man has no rights if he's on the birth certificate but hasn't sought visitation.

Actually, on second thought -- even the document you linked to says the man is considered the natural father if he is on the birth certificate with his consent.

Everything you are describing is the exact opposite of what I've encountered in my own custody battle, both in terms of putting the man's name on the birth certificate, and what rights that gives him later. I highly HIGHLY doubt that I could be denied a passport for my son without his father's written consent if the father had no rights, as you say.

I'm with @Fadeaway on this one -- for the sake of not derailing this thread further, I'll depart now. If the OP chooses to listen to the advice of someone who reads online legal forums rather than advice from people who've experienced these custody issues for themselves, that's on her. But to the OP -- please please consult a lawyer for yourself and be very careful with how you proceed.

 

[digger]

Not sure where in the world the OP is from, but in the UK, if a man is named as the father on a birth certificate, married or unmarried, he has parental rights.

I think it's probably best to leave this now at advising the OP to seek out legal advice specific to where they live.

 

[leslie82]

When I was in the process of getting my son's birth certificate, this was actually prohibited -- they...

It states that he is the legal father if he's on the birth certificate - as in putative father - but he has no rights until he goes to court to seek them. I'm really done with this because it's reaching no end. Every single search result I searched on this says exactly the same thing. Unmarried males have no rights until they establish them in court. They are recognized as the father but if they don't go to court to establish rights to visitation they have none.

I told the OP to talk to a lawyer.

 

[Suzetig]

Ok folks, a reminder that no one has a monopoly on the truth, particularly where there are fairly complex legal processes at play. This is an international forum and there are huge differences in legislation around parental rights and responsibilities so please move on. Any return to discussion around parental rights and responsibilities and I'll start thread banning folk.

 

[Copper Princess]

No he doesn't just because he's on the birth certificate. That's one step - but legally for a man to g...

This is correct. The name on the birth certificate does not give him rights. Paternity has to be established in order for him to pay child support and have visitation. Unfortunately she will have to hire an attorney and prove why he should not have visitation. A protective order is definitely needed.

 

[leslie82]

This is correct. The name on the birth certificate does not give him rights. Paternity has to b...

You should probably read the last post from one of the moderators...