Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Unmarried fathers rights, custody and visitation.

Options
24567…13

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    Ok. My error. Americans think of joint custody as split custody.

    Custody refers to the primary residence.


  • Options
    #33
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Ok. My error. Americans think of joint custody as split custody.

    Custody refers to the primary residence.

    With all due respect, I understand this far better than you do, metrovelvet. I'm not going to keep correcting you. So how about this:

    Tell us why, in one concise and unbiased sentence, why introducing joint custody as standard is a bad move? And if possible, offer an alternative.


  • Options
    #34
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    It's not a bad move. I just dont think its going to make any difference.

    Equal joint custody would be a bad move.

    Sorry that was three sentences.


  • Options
    #35
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    If you have access two days a week, you do not have custody. None because the child is never a resident in your home.

    So the overnights don't count? The clothes, the meals, the everything we do together?

    The paperwork that states joint custody?


  • Options
    #36
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    It's not a bad move. I just dont think its going to make any difference.

    Said by you:

    • I can see the abortion rates sky rocket.
    • If already ambivalent fathers are now forced by law to take the child 50 percent of the time, you can bet on one of two things. Either they will apply more pressure to the mother to be to get an abortion (thus increasing her likelyhood if getting ine), or they will do a total runner, also increasing her likelyhood of getting one.
    • There is a downside to it. And it will affect plenty.
    • The men who run are running from maintenance as well as fatherhood.
    • I guess I dont understand what the new policy means exactly. Its unclear.
    Demonising men just a little, no? You must think we're monsters!
    Equal joint custody would be a bad move.

    Why would equal joint custody be a bad move?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    If you have overnights then obviously yes. You have two days a week of custody. You said two days access.


  • Options
    #38
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    Klingon Hamlet wrote: »
    Said by you:



    Demonising men just a little, no? You must think we're monsters!



    Why would equal joint custody be a bad move?

    No. I don't.

    But I can see problems with reluctant fathers, which are more common than you may think.

    Split custody is parent, not child centred.

    Anyone who grew up with divorce will tell you that a life of suitcases in the hallway, two birthdays, two christmasses, missed events with friends, etc etc is not nice and to have the state impose such a lifestyle on children and families all over the nation is not right.


  • Options
    #39
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    If you have overnights then obviously yes. You have two days a week of custody. You said two days access.

    Custody and access are seperate. I could've just had 1 hour of access and still be granted joint custody. Again, respectfully, metrovelvet I know the ins and outs of this.


  • Options
    #40
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    No. I don't.

    But I can see problems with reluctant fathers, which are more common than you may think.

    Split custody is parent, not child centred.

    Anyone who grew up with divorce will tell you that a life of suitcases in the hallway, two birthdays, two christmasses, missed events with friends, etc etc is not nice and to have the state impose such a lifestyle on children and families all over the nation is not right.

    The alternative is that daddy wonders what their child's face looks like on Christmas Day and birthdays, because apparently some dads are reluctant. Brilliant. You're right metrovelvet. Let's hit that pause button before things get way out of hand.

    "Kids, stay with mammy, she's genetically disposed towards being the better parent. Dads, tough luck, you're male, and reluctant."


  • Options
    #41
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    No. Try to imagine what its like to be back and forth between two homes.

    I really dont think you're being fair.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    So basically they get 50 percent custody if they want it. Yeah. Big wow. That's not right. That's privalege.

    What if the mother only wants her 50 and not 90?

    With equal custody the term primary carer doesnt apply. Yippee. A country full of suitcases in the hallway and an abortion rate to beat the band.

    The courts are going to swell, not deflate.

    Custody IS residency klingon.

    I'd have 50/50 access. No suit cases in the hallway here and there never has been, or ever will.

    Plenty of parents have joint custody, but not 50/50 access.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #43
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    K-9 wrote: »
    I'd have 50/50 access. No suit cases in the hallway here and there never has been, or ever will.

    Plenty of parents have joint custody, but not 50/50 access.
    And does the state force you to take your child for half the week?


  • Options
    #44
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    No. I don't.

    Anyone who grew up with divorce will tell you that a life of suitcases in the hallway, two birthdays, two christmasses, missed events with friends, etc etc is not nice and to have the state impose such a lifestyle on children and families all over the nation is not right.

    Anyone? You serious?
    metrovelvet wrote:
    No. Try to imagine what its like to be back and forth between two homes.

    I really dont think you're being fair.

    Actually, I think you aren't being fair.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #45
    K-9
    Registered Users Posts: 43,311 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    And does the state force you to take your child for half the week?

    Nope. Neither does the German proposal either, because the state can't force people to do that.

    You seem intent on bringing this strawman into the discussion though. Always seems to come up on similar discussions. Personally, I'd say it's to with a feeling of loss of control and scare mongering.

    Probably isn't fair though!

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • Options
    #46
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    K-9 wrote: »
    Nope. Neither does the German proposal either, because the state can't force people to do that.

    You seem intent on bringing this strawman into the discussion though. Always seems to come up on similar discussions. Personally, I'd say it's to with a feeling of loss of control and scare mongering.

    Probably isn't fair though!

    Right but Klingon asked me why I didnt think state ordered equal custody was a good idea. So I answered him.


  • Options
    #47
    OUTOFSYNC
    Registered Users Posts: 136 ✭✭OUTOFSYNC


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    No. I don't.

    But I can see problems with reluctant fathers, which are more common than you may think.

    Split custody is parent, not child centred.

    Anyone who grew up with divorce will tell you that a life of suitcases in the hallway, two birthdays, two christmasses, missed events with friends, etc etc is not nice and to have the state impose such a lifestyle on children and families all over the nation is not right.

    I dont agree with these sentiments. I think most recent studies are contrary to what you are saying.

    The adult children of divorced parents as a group are happier when they've had substantial amounts of time with BOTH parents after divorce than those who grew up with one parent and contact with the other parent minimised.


  • Options
    #48
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    Hi mums and dads, just thought I'd spread the word:

    Ray Kelly of the Unmarried and Seperated Families of Ireland---a group dedicated to supporting, advising and counselling parents through family break-ups, and the consequential arrangements for their children---will appear in an interview on RTE'S SIX ONE NEWS tonight.

    Please tune in and check it out. Hopefully, thanks to Minister Mary White's hugely positive comments re: unmarried parents' rights we now face a time when broken families agree on the best interests of their children outside of court (wherever and whenever possible, at least).


  • Options
    #49
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    Here's the interview...short but sweet...kudos to Minister White...fast-forward to 14:30:

    RTE SIX ONE NEWS


  • Options
    #50
    wolfpawnat
    Registered Users Posts: 6,124 ✭✭✭wolfpawnat


    Its not enough, they say they are reviewing it and some changes might be made and if they are, some think it won't be all the way to automatic rights, so it is not enough. They say that it will depend on the relationship with the mother, no offence (and I am a women in this situation myself) but some women are vindictive and coniving b!tches. They are all for getting money off the dad but not a hope would they give him the legal right to his child.

    Men have to jump through hoops in the courtroom to be called the father of their child, a women merely has to have the child to be called its mother legally. I find this sickening, a woman could be a drug addict that does not care about the child and sees it only for social welfare benefits, but a man who is a doctor/vet/bus driver/etc has to go to court for it. It is not right.

    It has taken my partner and I over a year to get this sorted and I am glad to say it will be soon through the courts, but it is embarrassing having to into a court to get this done! It should be automatic!


  • Options
    #51
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    wolfpawnat wrote: »
    Its not enough, they say they are reviewing it and some changes might be made and if they are, some think it won't be all the way to automatic rights, so it is not enough. They say that it will depend on the relationship with the mother, no offence (and I am a women in this situation myself) but some women are vindictive and coniving b!tches. They are all for getting money off the dad but not a hope would they give him the legal right to his child.

    Men have to jump through hoops in the courtroom to be called the father of their child, a women merely has to have the child to be called its mother legally. I find this sickening, a woman could be a drug addict that does not care about the child and sees it only for social welfare benefits, but a man who is a doctor/vet/bus driver/etc has to go to court for it. It is not right.

    It has taken my partner and I over a year to get this sorted and I am glad to say it will be soon through the courts, but it is embarrassing having to into a court to get this done! It should be automatic!

    Why is it taking over a year?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    wolfpawnat
    Registered Users Posts: 6,124 ✭✭✭wolfpawnat


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Why is it taking over a year?

    It took us ages to see what means they're are of getting equal guardianship. Apparently there is a form both parents can sign that also has to be witnessed by the Commissioners for the Oaths, nut that isn't worth toss all in Court, then finally one of our friends that is working in a legal practice sorted us out and got us a court date and everything. We got it sorted in the Spring, court date isn't til mid Autumn!!!!


  • Options
    #53
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    wolfpawnat wrote: »
    It took us ages to see what means they're are of getting equal guardianship. Apparently there is a form both parents can sign that also has to be witnessed by the Commissioners for the Oaths, nut that isn't worth toss all in Court, then finally one of our friends that is working in a legal practice sorted us out and got us a court date and everything. We got it sorted in the Spring, court date isn't til mid Autumn!!!!

    Oh I see. So you have to take the sworn form and present it to a judge. Yeah, the courts are clogged up with this crap.

    If you both sign it and its sworn by a CFO, then it should be sent in and filed. It shouldnt need a judge. Stupid procedure.

    I have a friend who has been waiting four years for a court date to sort out a whole bunch of stuff. Crazyness.


  • Options
    #54
    wolfpawnat
    Registered Users Posts: 6,124 ✭✭✭wolfpawnat


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Oh I see. So you have to take the sworn form and present it to a judge. Yeah, the courts are clogged up with this crap.

    If you both sign it and its sworn by a CFO, then it should be sent in and filed. It shouldnt need a judge. Stupid procedure.

    I have a friend who has been waiting four years for a court date to sort out a whole bunch of stuff. Crazyness.

    It is madness! According to our friend this is actually the easy route as I am willing to give my son's dad the Guardianship, but if I was being a b!tch it could take longer and be far more complex!


  • Options
    #55
    PopUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 236 ✭✭PopUp


    Treoir made it sound very easy, if both parents are in agreement.

    http://www.independent.ie/opinion/letters/fathers-actually-do-have-rights-2297113.html

    It's when somebody starts acting the bollix that everything gets drawn-out, complicated, expensive, and unjust.


  • Options
    #56
    MojoMaker
    Registered Users Posts: 4,686 ✭✭✭MojoMaker


    It is that easy. Wolfpawnat's case would be an exception. There must be more to the story.


  • Options
    #57
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    MojoMaker wrote: »
    It is that easy. Wolfpawnat's case would be an exception. There must be more to the story.

    It is that easy when both are in agreement. But because all the power rests in one person, if there's bad feeling, a battle begins. Hence the thousands of court battles a year for guardianship etc...


  • Options
    #58
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    Klingon Hamlet wrote: »
    It is that easy when both are in agreement. But because all the power rests in one person, if there's bad feeling, a battle begins. Hence the thousands of court battles a year for guardianship etc...

    Wollfpawnat is in agreement with her partner.


  • Options
    #59
    wolfpawnat
    Registered Users Posts: 6,124 ✭✭✭wolfpawnat


    MojoMaker wrote: »
    It is that easy. Wolfpawnat's case would be an exception. There must be more to the story.
    Klingon Hamlet wrote: »
    It is that easy when both are in agreement. But because all the power rests in one person, if there's bad feeling, a battle begins. Hence the thousands of court battles a year for guardianship etc...

    There is not more to the story. We have always been in agreement since day one about both parents being guardians. My child has the fathers surname and was named after a member of the fathers family!

    We were told by a solicitor that if you want a legally standing guardianship situation, you have to go the court route and getting dates are difficult due to families arguing over everything!


  • Options
    #60
    Klingon Hamlet
    Registered Users Posts: 2,738 ✭✭✭Klingon Hamlet


    metrovelvet wrote: »
    Wollfpawnat is in agreement with her partner.

    Witnessed agreements can be contested in court. Read up on it. Wollfpawnat's right. The agreement has to be presented to a judge to be stamped and signed, silly but true.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    metrovelvet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,376 ✭✭✭metrovelvet


    They should have two queues. One for those in agreement and one for those contesting so the latter dont hold up the former. Not fair.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement