Guardianship for father working in UK

Kevhog1988

Not sure if this is in the correct section, mods apologies if it isnt.

Ok basically i live and work in the uk as a quantity surveyor (no work in ireland after two degrees so forced out of ireland to further my career and basically survive). I have a 18 month old son at home. I split from his mother when she was 3 months pregnant (her decision not mine before i get attacked by all the single mothers). I make it home every second weekend to see him however sometimes i am unable to attend due to work commitments (i basically run a civil engineering company and sometimes am forced to work weekends against my wishes). I pay maintenance by direct debit (€70 per week) and also pay every second months creche fees (€140 per month). As of yesterday i have begun the process of applying for joint legal guardianship as i feel i currently have no say in his upbringing (education, spirituality etc) and also wish to have some rights (albeit limited by current irish law) to decide upon his future.

My main question is will my current residence in the UK affect my request to become his joint legal guardian??.

Also at the time of his birth his mother would not allow for him to have my surname (or even double-barrelled). Is it possible for to request for this to be changed??. Some people may find this a minor/petty thing but as i am quite proud to have a son i would also like for him to bear my surname if possible.

Any input or previous experience is greatly appreciated

Ms. Pingui

As far as I know once the baby has been registered with the mothers name it can only be changed to yours if you marry her.

The Corinthian

Living outside the state should not affect your ability to get guardianship rights, but it will negatively affect your ability to enforce them, which is close to impossible at the best of times.

livinsane

Regarding the name, I know it's possible to change the name on a child's passport once the parents can provide two years proof of usage from two different sources [e.g. child registered at creche/school/doctor/dentist under the name] so those records would have to be altered before the name is "legally" changed.

Kevhog1988

livinsane wrote: »

Regarding the name, I know it's possible to change the name on a child's passport once the parents can provide two years proof of usage from two different sources [e.g. child registered at creche/school/doctor/dentist under the name] so those records would have to be altered before the name is "legally" changed.

But in this case i cant see her agreeing to that

Kevhog1988

The Corinthian wrote: »

Living outside the state should not affect your ability to get guardianship rights, but it will negatively affect your ability to enforce them, which is close to impossible at the best of times.

Thanks for your input mate, always a wealth of knowledge ive noticed from previous threads. Although the irish family law system is grossly unfair, i feel some rights i.e guardianship are better than none which i currently hold.

Ash.J.Williams

Get your solicitor to get the ball rolling in asking for joint guardianship. Means little but you should get it anyway. If the mother disagrees then she will have to go to court.

Kevhog1988

I already have the ball rolling on that but i was just wondering if anybody in similar circumstances has done it???

Ash.J.Williams

Just got mine last year. Woman made it clear she "had to" because i would have to be an abuser or a baby beater not to get it....charming eh?!!

Kevhog1988

i have a few questions for you ill stick on a pm

Synyster Shadow

I have a cousin who was married to the mother of his 4 girls and she now lives in England with them and the terms she agreed to before goin have not been maintained at all. My cousin is now fighting her through the courts. When married they say it's 50/50 rights but she got round that. I know she tried to change there surname and would have if he didn't find out and stop her! And any name can be changed if you want through depo but it costs money! I know a few who did it so the father couldn't track the kids down when they went to England after divorce. If ye both work through Irish law it's straightforward ish but if one works from the English law it gets really messy and I know they favour the mother which sucks as I know loads of dad's that are clearly the better option. Iv also seen it work better the other way but the English law is different

Best of luck and just keep fighting it if possible

The Corinthian

theemigrant wrote: »

Although the irish family law system is grossly unfair, i feel some rights i.e guardianship are better than none which i currently hold.

True. Broadly speaking guardianship presently affords the following:

The right to block an adoption. Without guardianship, only a "reasonable attempt" to consult (i.e. inform) the father is necessary. This basically means, that the father need not actually even be informed in reality. However, if the father is a guardian, his express permission is required to allow an adoption.

The right to have a say whether the child may leave the state. For example, an emigration may be blocked on the basis that doing so will adversely affect the child's ability to have contact with the father. Bare in mind, this can be overturned.

The right to have a say in the educational and religious upbringing of the child. In practice this is pretty much meaningless; for example, you may disagree with, circumcision, christening or that the child is in a particular school, but the mother may simply go ahead without informing the other guardian, with any of these, and a court will not sanction her for it, and in the case of the school, will likely even conclude that removing the child from the school will be detrimental to it.

In your case, not living in Ireland makes the second right largely unenforceable (unless, for example, she were to emigrate to Australia, in which case you may have a case).

If the 'reform' paper on guardianship, that came out two years ago, is anything to go by, all but the first right will essentially be abandoned in favour of the custodial parent having sole right to make these decisions.

The first right is the only truly guaranteed and enforceable right guardianship affords. In the vast majority of cases, this is a moot point, but it does happen that if the mother enters a new relationship she can seek to 'replace' the biological father with her new partner. The second, can be important, but is not a guaranteed right. The last is a joke.

Kevhog1988

The Corinthian wrote: »

True. Broadly speaking guardianship presently affords the following:

The right to block an adoption. Without guardianship, only a "reasonable attempt" to consult (i.e. inform) the father is necessary. This basically means, that the father need not actually even be informed in reality. However, if the father is a guardian, his express permission is required to allow an adoption.

The right to have a say whether the child may leave the state. For example, an emigration may be blocked on the basis that doing so will adversely affect the child's ability to have contact with the father. Bare in mind, this can be overturned.

The right to have a say in the educational and religious upbringing of the child. In practice this is pretty much meaningless; for example, you may disagree with, circumcision, christening or that the child is in a particular school, but the mother may simply go ahead without informing the other guardian, with any of these, and a court will not sanction her for it, and in the case of the school, will likely even conclude that removing the child from the school will be detrimental to it.

In your case, not living in Ireland makes the second right largely unenforceable (unless, for example, she were to emigrate to Australia, in which case you may have a case).

If the 'reform' paper on guardianship, that came out two years ago, is anything to go by, all but the first right will essentially be abandoned in favour of the custodial parent having sole right to make these decisions.

The first right is the only truly guaranteed and enforceable right guardianship affords. In the vast majority of cases, this is a moot point, but it does happen that if the mother enters a new relationship she can seek to 'replace' the biological father with her new partner. The second, can be important, but is not a guaranteed right. The last is a joke.

I have had these messages off her before when the child was less then a month or so old that he would be taken her husbands name if she got married. This was done purely to wind me up i know but still hard stuff to deal with when your trying to complete a days work.

She stopped me from seeing him saturday after i had travelled home paid for flights etc... her sister dropped him to me for a few hours sunday but i had made plans for saturday to bring him to meet my friends little boy etc. Not nice going home to twiddle your thumbs for the day when your mate is ringing you to see when youll be over

The Corinthian

Sounds like she resents that you did not want to ultimately be with her.

I understand your situation, but there's honestly little point in brooding over it. Problems between single or separated/divorced parents are ultimately a result of problems between each other; sometimes the lion's share of the problems are with the mother, sometimes with the father and sometimes with both in equal measure. Whoever is at fault, if anyone, it's almost always manifested as power games.

All you can do is the best you can, without committing harakiri on the altar of some perceived expectation of what you should be doing. As tempting as it may be to brood over the mother's actions, you're better off letting go of them (although do keep a record nonetheless), doing what is available and practical and being there for your child, as best as you can, as they slowly begin to figure out things for themselves and can more and more interact with you directly.

Guardianship will give you some recognition, but it'll also result in increased belligerence from her - after all, you're challenging her absolute control over your child and so a negative response to this is inevitable. You may expect increased obstruction in access, so you should be ready to record and raise this legally sooner rather than later and letting it drag out.

Kevhog1988

Had court today... Everything agreed beforehand so presumed was just a case of turning up and going through the formalities. Was met with a new request for more money etc. After spending a lot of money today and missing work i have to do it al again whilst she gets free legal aid. This country is unfair!!

The Corinthian

Sounds like she may play a legal war of attrition. As you point out, it doesn't cost her anything to drag you into court, while it costs you a fair bit in travel, accommodation (if applicable) and legal council. In theory she could do this every month or force you to do so (by blocking access) repeatedly, with the intention of wearing you down both psychologically and financially.

Talk to a solicitor about this possibility as I believe she can be legally blocked from such harassment if she abuses the system in this way.

Kevhog1988

I now also have to produce proof of all income etc. As i work away i save a chunk of my wages as i wish to progress in life and hopefully open my own business eventually.. Will i be penalised by this in court???

Ash.J.Williams

theemigrant wrote: »

I now also have to produce proof of all income etc. As i work away i save a chunk of my wages as i wish to progress in life and hopefully open my own business eventually.. Will i be penalised by this in court???

I'm not sure how it works, I haven't had to submit any bank statements yet. I dread the day the judge tells me i need to cut down on this and cancel that to free up cash

The Corinthian

theemigrant wrote: »

I now also have to produce proof of all income etc. As i work away i save a chunk of my wages as i wish to progress in life and hopefully open my own business eventually.. Will i be penalised by this in court???

Depends on the judge. However, in my experience of people who've gone through this, yes. You're better off in debt; paying back loans, mortgages and the like than having saved anything in a bank account, when they do the calculations.

Kevhog1988

Makes no sense... if i was out every weekend sticking it up my nose or pissing it against a wall its a different scenario but in my eyes i provide over and beyond whats needed for my son and they still want more... would nearly make a man sign on the dole

Kevhog1988

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

I'm not sure how it works, I haven't had to submit any bank statements yet. I dread the day the judge tells me i need to cut down on this and cancel that to free up cash

well any income i save for a rainy day etc is seen as unneeded disposable income

Ash.J.Williams

the only thing going for me is that my kid lives bleedin miles away and my car is dying! Sorry judge but i'm buying a reasonable reliable car with my cash.

Kevhog1988

I live in manchester for work... Same thing mate but i was hoping to purchase a house... i provide more than enough for my son to live comfortably, i dont understand why i should supplement her when she refuses to work

Ash.J.Williams

theemigrant wrote: »

I live in manchester for work... Same thing mate but i was hoping to purchase a house... i provide more than enough for my son to live comfortably, i dont understand why i should supplement her when she refuses to work

same here, compared to her i have nothing so i hope it never gets raised in court,

Synyster Shadow

theemigrant wrote: »

Makes no sense... if i was out every weekend sticking it up my nose or pissing it against a wall its a different scenario but in my eyes i provide over and beyond whats needed for my son and they still want more... would nearly make a man sign on the dole

Credit unions and such places like these are safer for saving I'd only keep a small amount in bank account. Maybe from here on slowly move money around your doing nothin wrong as you said you provide for your son but you got to protect yourself too and some day he may decide to live with you. I was over 12 when parents divorced think it's from that age the child decides where it wants to be

Kevhog1988

Synyster Shadow wrote: »

Credit unions and such places like these are safer for saving I'd only keep a small amount in bank account. Maybe from here on slowly move money around your doing nothin wrong as you said you provide for your son but you got to protect yourself too and some day he may decide to live with you. I was over 12 when parents divorced think it's from that age the child decides where it wants to be

Thanks for the advice mate.

Synyster Shadow

No problem I'd move small amounts regularly maybe say you had things that needed fixing and you had the time now to do it. Statements are dangerous from banks

Kevhog1988

I have no problem paying for his upkeep but im a firm believer that his costs should be split 50/50

Synyster Shadow

theemigrant wrote: »

I have no problem paying for his upkeep but im a firm believer that his costs should be split 50/50

I can understand that. My dad had to pay for all my needs even when I was living in my mam's (I chose to move in with him when I could) iv seen lots of women exploit there power over the child's father it's not right they get all the power what if you had custody of your son I bet she wouldn have to pay. As I say you provide for him your entitled to keep money set aside for what you need and for things that arise and the future. Of course you'll only find out things that can get you caught out as they arise in courts and so on. She has a solicitor that knows the system and must be pushing her in the right direction

The Corinthian

theemigrant wrote: »

I have no problem paying for his upkeep but im a firm believer that his costs should be split 50/50

Doesn't work that way. In theory it does, but in practice the onus tends to be placed upon the non-custodial parent.

Institutionalized sexism is another issue unfortunately, in that the percentage of non-custodial mothers who have to pay any maintenance is an embarrassingly small percentage of the non-custodial fathers who do.

If you want to buy a house, I'm afraid you may have missed the boat on that one. To begin with any savings you have will be taken into account when deciding upon maintenance, so you will effectively be penalized for being responsible with your money.

Secondly, and less well known, is that because of the bizarre nature of spousal and child maintenance in Ireland where there are no set rates (as with most other countries) and the claimant's right to 'come back to the well' in the future, it makes it difficult for banks to calculate the ability for payees to repay any mortgage.

This means that the moment you are paying any maintenance of any kind, your ability to get a mortgage takes a nosedive, making it much more difficult to get one in the first place.

Ash.J.Williams

what i gathered last time i looked for a loan was that banks ignore non court agreed maintenance. What i gathered from that is if your loan went into arrears they would stop you paying your non court maintenance?