Fathers' rights, or the lack of them....

[Beach Hut]

My rights as a father to Junior are to either be grunted at, ignored, told to shut up or always asked for money.

Who is the winner here ?

 

[clapham_gull]

My rights as a father to Junior are to either be grunted at, ignored, told to shut up or always asked for money.

Who is the winner here ?

Your wife,


( saves her having to do it....)

 

[itszamora]

It seems to me to be perfectly reasonable for a mature adult woman to take the rational decision that she doesn't want a man who she judges unsuitable to go anywhere near the upbringing of her child - particularly since he plainly never took the trouble to find out that he'd made her pregnant.

She is acting responsibly. He has no rights at all.

But surely she's as much to blame for the pregnancy as he is? And she could tell him?

 

[Beach Hut]

Your wife,


( saves her having to do it....)

Wrong, she gets just as much abuse

 

[Chicken Runner61]

It seems to me to be perfectly reasonable for a mature adult woman to take the rational decision that she doesn't want a man who she judges unsuitable to go anywhere near the upbringing of her child - particularly since he plainly never took the trouble to find out that he'd made her pregnant.

She is acting responsibly. He has no rights at all.

You are so wrong - She isn't rational or mature. Wall is unfit to judge family matters as he is out of touch with the real world and bases his judgments on family life 40 years ago.

The point is that the bloke has no choice because SHE doesn't want the child but if SHE did she could make him pay financially for it for most of the rest of their lives.

It doesn't sound like the child has rights either because it will be 18 before it has the right to know its father. And then he/she will probably look him up possibly causing further problems with any family he then has and possibly ruining any relationship with his wife & kids then.

Still it doesn't matter coz mother know best eh?

This is the situation before Walls crap judgment.

> A mother's decision to put a child conceived during a one-night stand
> up for adoption has turned into a legal dilemma over parental rights
> and responsibilities.
> The woman, 20, has told the court of appeal she does not want anyone
> to know the identity of the father, a work colleague. However, her
> local authority believes her family and the father should be
> approached to see if they are willing and able to look after the baby
> girl, who is now 17 weeks old.
>
> A county court has already ordered that the woman's parents and the
> father should know. Yesterday three appeal court judges were asked to
> reverse that order. The local authority is preparing to take the
> child into care after receiving a report that she was "abandoned" by
> the mother at the hospital where she was born.
> Eleanor Hamilton QC, representing the mother, said she had not told
> her parents or the father about her pregnancy because she did not
> want them to know. "This girl was unable to bring herself to tell the
> parents and drove herself to hospital in the dead of night to have
> the child.
>
> "She is a perfectly ordinary girl in a job she loves, who is living
> her own life. That should be taken into account by the court." Ms
> Hamilton said the mother lived away from her parents.
>
> Although the parents now know about the child, she has consistently
> refused to name the father. Ms Hamilton said: "It was, on the account
> given by the mother, a one-night stand with a fellow employee while
> both were on the rebound having broken up with long-term partners.
>
> "He is now back with his fiancee, continuing with that relationship,
> and has no idea she has given birth to a child."
>
> Judith Rowe QC, representing the baby's legal guardian, said that if
> the woman's family could not help or were unsuitable, then the father
> and his family would be approached. Ms Rowe said the local authority
> believed the child should be brought up by the family if possible.
>
> Lord Justice Thorpe, who led the panel of three judges, said: "That
> sounds doctrinaire. It is difficult to imagine a more dysfunctional
> family than this."
>
> A court order prevents identification of the mother and child, the
> local authority and where the case occurred. Judgment was reserved.
>

 

[tedebear]

What the article states (obviously as he doesn't know) is whether or not the father wanted to be involved? What child wants any parent who doesn't want them - Mum or Dad?