Giving up rights to a child

Quality

The Corinthian wrote: »

To which I asked you whether you would say the same of a mother who did the same (i.e. adoption / abortion).

After all, you made a pretty strong accusation of the father in question, so it's only fair that your reasoning is tested.

So would you like to respond, or am I to take it that you come from the "do as I say, don't do as I do" school of child rights?

I believe that if you father/mother a child that you should be responsible for it for life.

I do not agree with abortion although I would not condemn a person for carrying this out. They have to live with their own conscience for the rest of their life.

I think the instances of adoption in this country are very rare in recent years. But as I said if you father/mother a child it is your flesh and blood and you should be responsible for it for the rest of your life.

I do feel for this guy, He is obviously going through a stressful time with this woman and her family however Giving up rights to a child is very final. He would never have any comeback on this in his life. I just cannot see how this man wants to close this chapter in his life and not fight for his flesh and blood.

HOw can he just walk away with out a fight?

The Corinthian

I see, so you have no problem condemning a man for this, but you wouldn't do so with a woman. I noticed that you also fluffed your answer on whether you'd condemn a mother for putting her child up for adoption.

You do recognize that you are suggesting a pretty hypocritical double standard, don't you?

the_syco

Quality wrote: »

I would not condemn a person for carrying this out.

Quality wrote: »

if you father/mother a child it is your flesh and blood and you should be responsible for it for the rest of your life.

Quality wrote: »

HOw can he just walk away with out a fight?

So you're saying "How can he do this that and the other..." but if she wants to flush the baby out of her life, it's A-OK?

Quality

Ok, here are my undiluted views on this issue.

Abortion is murder.

Adoption is an easy way out.

Giving up the rights to your own child. Is the easy way out.

Having kids is not the easiest thing in the world but the most fufilling... Its the only thing in life worth doing.

This man wants to give up his rights to his child. In my opinion in his case. he is lucky to be able to have visitation rights to his child in the first place. He was obviously concerned enough about this child in the first place to seek a dna test. why would he put himself forward for his if he did not actively want to be part of his childs life.

he now knows he is the father of this child. He says the baby is sleeping when he gets visits. WTF. What do babys do??? They sleep!!

I dont know but it seems odd to me, That a man who wants to know if he is the father of a child, puts himself through the stress of going through a dna test, wanting to know the outcome of whether he is a father or not. Then when he finds out he is the father, wants to bail out after a few things go wrong on him. Did he purely want this dna test to annoy his ex and her husband, is he now looking for the easy way out of the situation. Does he not want to have a part of his childs life? Is it secretely because the ex does not want to get back with him? Is it cause she wants to get on with her life and get back with her husband?

Is this is what is hurting him and therefore he wants to cut himself out of his kids life?? Is this right?

If he didnt want to be a father, would he not have wanted a dna test.

Nevyn

Situations are rarely that black and white Quality.

embee

metrovelvet wrote: »

Can you love and provide in absence or is it conditional upon your time allotments? What - would you suggest an hourly rate?

Yes, very snide.

Parents should pay for their childrens upkeep. That is basic logic. My point is that there is a certain breed of single parent out there who are only too happy to take huge amounts of money from the other childs parent, whilst at the same time withholding access to the child. An unmarried father doesn't have any rights at all (which is crazy) and there are certain women out there who will exploit that to their fullest. I don't get the impression from the OP that the father of this child has just very simply washed his hands of his child and walked away without a care in the world. It does sound like the childs mother is making life very, very difficult for him and has left the Dad with very few options. He may not be in a position to pay for a costly legal battle... who knows? None of us here know the full story. My point is merely this - you can't take with one hand and take with the other. Basic decency would suggest that you do what is in the best interests of the child in question. I think denying a child access to their father (for little more than what seems like point-scoring... from what the OP has said the Dad in this situation isn't a bad person) is fundamentally wrong. God only knows what the mother of this child could say to the child in the future to explain why Dad isn't around. It really is a horrible situation for the Dad in this scenario and I really feel for him.

Nevyn

Chances are it sounds like the mother in this situation will tell her child that her husband is thier father and never let the child know any different.

The Corinthian

Quality wrote: »

I do not agree with abortion although I would not condemn a person for carrying this out.

Abortion is murder.

You've not really worked this out in your head, have you?

Nevyn

Lets not turn this into an abortion debate, thank you.

Lazarus2.0

Thaedydal , out of 40 posts on this thread has nailed it twice .


Sometimes the relationship/interaction between the parents of a child be come so antagonistic and stressful that one of them decides to cut the other out of their life due to the mental and emotional stress involved.

In this case the loser is everyone, both parents and the child suffer, which make it truly unfortunate when parents are unrealistic and unreasonable
about co parenting and access.


and

Chances are it sounds like the mother in this situation will tell her child that her husband is thier father and never let the child know any different.



Time for daddy to be a daddy .... or not

The Corinthian

Thaedydal wrote: »

Lets not turn this into an abortion debate, thank you.

No it's not. Quality is just a little contradictory (or hypocritical) is my point. She won't condemn mother's who act in a certain way but her reaction is to condemn fathers who do likewise. Whether I was describing abortion or adoption, would make no difference.

Sometimes the relationship between the mother and father can be so belligerent that it becomes unworkable and a clean break is the only option. Women reject their children because the circumstances - social, economic, or otherwise - are not right every day. Why should men be held to a higher moral standard?

BostonB

patrick2007 wrote: »

Without giving too much detail my friend has not taken this decision lightly at all. The mother of this child has made it quite clear by her and her families actions that they do not want my friend to have anything to do with the child. My friend and his family have put up with some of the most unbelieveable behaviour in this regard.
Believe me when I say that my friend has jumped thru so many hoops to get visitation rights etc. that I dont know how he did it to be honest.
Again I dont want to give too much away but you need to remember that this woman said she had a miscarriage in the hope that my friend would disappear... I suppose.
It got to the stage where this situation was tearing his own family apart i.e. by constant court dates, solicitors letters, extremely difficult visitations, by this I mean the baby always being asleep, the baby being kept in the buggy with covers practially from head to toe, my friend did try to talk to the mother about why the baby was always asleep and was met by silence all the time.

I don't understand any of this tbh. While the baby is young its quite possible the baby will sleep a lot, but thats not going to happen all the time. And regardless of what the mother or her family does, if you have visitation rights the child is going to know the father. Eventually anyway. Its not going to be easy thats for sure.

None of the above is really the issue. The issue is does the father want to know and be involved in his childs life or not. Only the father can decide that.

metrovelvet

nessyguin wrote: »

Thaedydal , out of 40 posts on this thread has nailed it twice .


Sometimes the relationship/interaction between the parents of a child be come so antagonistic and stressful that one of them decides to cut the other out of their life due to the mental and emotional stress involved.

Except when a mother does it shes denying access and violating father's rights, blah blah blah, but when a father does it it's because it's "too stressfull" to deal with the other parent.

Nevyn

metrovelvet wrote: »

Except when a mother does it shes denying access and violating father's rights, blah blah blah, but when a father does it it's because it's "too stressfull" to deal with the other parent.

Yup aren't double standards fun ?

I do agree that a person has to do what they have to do for self preservation in a crises or when they are in a shítty place in their life but I do think that long term denial of access and contact with the other parent ( except in extreme cases where it would be detrimental to the child ) should be resumed if possible when things normalise, be the parent under stress be the one with full custody or not.

People need to go get counseling and stop using their children to score points against the other parent imho.

K-9

metrovelvet wrote: »

Except when a mother does it shes denying access and violating father's rights, blah blah blah, but when a father does it it's because it's "too stressfull" to deal with the other parent.

Well the father is doing nothing illegal in both instances. If he has got access orders, she is denying the fathers his rights. If an unmarried father walks away it doesn't matter as he is a legal stranger. Then again, Ms.O in the Mr.G case was doing nothing illegal in taking the children away and his case was seen as an attack on woman's rights by some, so gender doesn't really count when it comes to double standards.

Anyway, back to the OP. I know he got a DNA Test, but was the birth certificate ever changed? If it has been the child will always know who the father was. Something to consider as well.

The man is being attacked here and there is reasons for it, but somehow the mother is getting away lightly here. Seriously, she said she had a miscarriage, he had to get a DNA sample, now the baby always seems to be asleep all the time.....Am I being a little suspicious? but she doesn't sound like a candidate for 50/50 parenting! :rolleyes:

She resents the father for her own personal and selfish reasons and I'm sure the husband isn't to happy with him being about either.

Seems like the father wasn't the one not facing up to his actions and responsibilities. She had an affair or a 1 night stand and wants to erase it from her history. The Dad walking away is what this woman wants. She wants no trace of the real dad and then when the child gets older, she can put all the blame on the Dad for walking away.

Anyway OP, I'd try and convince him to stay about for a while yet. It's a major decision to be making at this early stage. If he sticks at it, he will get time with the child and get a bond. He'll be able to take the child away and do things with her and in a year or two apply for more access.

I know he's fed up with the crap, but emotions are raw, and believe me, with time it will get easier. Eventually, she'll know this man is sticking around and will have to deal with her responsibilities and just accept it.

I'm not letting the father go easy either, I mean what did he go to all this bother for, did he think everything in a situation like this was going to be perfect?

Time to continue what he has started.

Quality

Seanies32 wrote: »

Time to continue what he has started.

well said!!

The Corinthian

Quality wrote: »

well said!!

How's that double standard working out for you?

Quality

Good Morning Corinthian,

My double standards are working out just fine, Thank you for asking.

How are you today on this bright beautiful morning? Do you have anything else you would like to add, or are you just going to keep on repeating yourself?

Love you lots;), Jelly tots, Big Green Snots

Q. x x x

The Corinthian

Quality wrote: »

Do you have anything else you would like to add, or are you just going to keep on repeating yourself?

How about you respond to the contradiction in your position rather than ignoring it and maybe I'll not have to repeat myself. Putting your fingers in your ears and singing "la-la-la" isn't going to change that what you say doesn't add up.

You have no problem suggesting that mothers should be able to walk away from their flesh and blood, while men are damned if they do. Unless you can justify this double standard, you realistically need to apply the same moral standard to both genders.

embee

Lets keep this thread on-topic, kids.

The Corinthian

embee wrote: »

Lets keep this thread on-topic, kids.

This is on topic - Quality has based her advice to the OP on a flawed argument. Questioning the logic of this argument as a result has direct relevance to the OP's situation as a result.

Quality

I have made my opinion quite clear on this particular case,

I dont believe that this man should walk away from his child.

He has fathered this child, Had a DNA test done to proove it, This man is going to make a decision that is going to effect him for the rest of his life. And I think he should really consider his actions, This is a permanent decision, There will be little or no comeback on this for him after this.

This is my opinion in THIS case.

If on the other hand the Mother had posted a topic stating that she had fathered a child for another man other than her husband and now wanted him out of the childs life. I would be making a point to her that as this man is the father to the child he has every right to access. I would not agree with her either.

As stated before, Nobody is a winner here. It is a horrible situation to be in and the one who is going to suffer most is the poor innocent child.

Corinthian I am entitled to my opinions, You may not like them, I dont expect everyone to. But thats life.

The Corinthian

Quality wrote: »

If on the other hand the Mother had posted a topic stating that she had fathered a child for another man other than her husband and now wanted him out of the childs life. I would be making a point to her that as this man is the father to the child he has every right to access. I would not agree with her either.

Not the same thing though. If a mother suggested that she wanted to walk away from her child would you damn her equally or accept her right to do so?

Reverse the roles for a moment. A mother gives birth, but for a myriad of reasons (relationship with the father or his family, economic, etc) she simply cannot cope with the situation and as a result chooses that giving up the child for adoption is her best option. Is she scum in your eyes too?

Corinthian I am entitled to my opinions, You may not like them, I dont expect everyone to. But thats life.

And if you express them you have to accept that you'll be brought up on them if you're found to be talking nonsense. That's life too.

Pigletlover

Before I was born my father decided that he wanted nothing to do with my upbringing, leaving my mother to raise me by herself. He took the easy way out.

The father in this case has had to fight to firstly prove that he was in fact the father and then for visitation rights. He has had to put up with the mother and her family making life as difficult as possible for him so for anyone here to accuse the father in this case of taking the easy way out is incredibly unfair. Believe it or not, sometimes it's harder to walk away. The father has shown that he wants to be part of this child's life but the mother is doing all she can to shut him out. People have said 'think of the child', maybe that's what the father is doing. It's not fair on any child to be stuck in the middle of two feuding parents. I have seen mothers use their children to get money from the father, while the father doesn't even get to see the child. And then for the mother to turn around and tell the child that the reason they don't see their father is because daddy doesn't want to see them/daddy's too busy with his new girlfriend to spend time with you or some other lie. Is this fair on the child? I want to stress that not all mothers do this, most don't, but this mother has already lied by saying that she had suffered a miscarriage - that her unborn child was DEAD, so who knows what else she is capable of. Maybe the child would actually be happier growing up with his mother and her husband as the father figure. This would be incredibly painful on the father of the child and something that he will have to deal with every day. The easy way out? I don't think so.

metrovelvet

Pigletlover wrote: »

I want to stress that not all mothers do this, most don't, but this mother has already lied by saying that she had suffered a miscarriage - that her unborn child was DEAD, so who knows what else she is capable of. .

Yep. Pretending people are dead - as old as the hills. My adopted friend was told her father died in a motorcycle accident in Italy when her mother was pregnant. I didnt doubt it until the day I was told by the father of my child to pretend he was dead so I told her this and shes rethinking the whole thing.

WTF is wrong with people?

Desperate times desperate measures?

Nevyn

Note to all users this forum is not to be used for interpersonal axe grinding, or airing soiled linens if you have an issue with someone deal with it in an appropriate way and in an appropriate setting.





The thing is when two people who have a child separate or have a child outside of a stable committed relationship it can be the case that while on of the parents does want a relationship with their child they do not want to be dealing with the other parent.

This can get pretty ugly esp when one parent is left doing the lions share of the hands on parenting, the first two years are rough and they find themselves doing it alone.
This can cause all sorts of resentments and often as the child is so young the parent who does not have custody finds it very hard to establish a relationship with the baby and may decide to leave the other parent to it and will try establish a relationship with the child then they are older.

Which lefts face it sucks, for both parents they don't have someone to share their child's miles stones and achievements with in the same way, one of them gets all the dirty nappies and teething but they also get all the hugs and smiles and affection which makes parenting so rewarding which the other parent misses out on.


Yes it is important for children to have relationships with both their parents but this is not always possible from the every day they are born, sometimes it has to wait until the child is old enough to reason for themselves and then get to know their father/mother if the parent who has custody will let them do that and has not been illcouth enough to spend the intervening years poisoning the well.

Personally I am not 'in' a relationship with the father of my brats and there are days I am surprised my tounge is not a bloody stump from biting it but my children have a right to their relationship with their father and to get to know the type of person and the type of man he is for themselves and he has a right to grow and learn with his kids.

No one becomes magically a parent it is a huge and every changing learning curve and there are many types of parents.

*Page*

I'd like to hear back from the OP to what ever happened with the actual father of the child

Victor

Regarding inheritence, the child could be included in a will.