Should unmarried fathers have equal rights??

Chocholic7 · 19-07-2011 07:08PM #1

It's now 2011 and unmarried fathers still don't have equal rights. As my kids father was a greedy,abusive, immature, selfish man and sponged off me until I left him, I was glad it applied to him. If it wasn't for this system in place I would be unable to take my daughter abroad on hols or anything like this without his consent (which he never gave when I asked him to sign passport until I discovered there was a sole guardianship form for it). I am just wondering what everyone else's views are on this topic.

SheFiend · 19-07-2011 07:17PM

Unmarried fathers should have just as much right to their children as unmarried mothers. I don't understand why mothers automatically get full rights to the child.
I have seen an awful situation develop with three friends where honest, decent men lose their rights to see their own child, have to go through court time and time again to no avail, are made victims of blatant lies told by bitter ex-girlfriends, and finally, if they are very lucky, get to see their child once a week with supervision, as if they are a criminals!
I know this isn't always the case, (there are lots of amicable break-ups and sensible people too,) but these are examples of how bitter, vengeful women can take advantage of this glaring fault in the legal system, at the expense of their own children and the fathers of those children.
Takes two to make a child; why should one automatically have the right to see their child and the other has to fight in court for access??

wolfpawnat · 19-07-2011 07:27PM

It is wrong that fathers do not have automatic rights, it cost us €550 to go to court to get him what he deserved after all, he contributed half of the chromosomes. If a man is good enough to go into bed with, they should be good enough to get half rights.

The only cases where I would see extenuating circumstances is with rape cases and when the father has numerous convictions, after all, the child needs good role models in life!

I know there are deadbeat fathers (my own being one), but why should all dads has to suffer for them?

Stark · 19-07-2011 07:28PM

Chocholic7 wrote: »

It's now 2011 and unmarried fathers still don't have equal rights. In my case, I am delighted, as my daughters father was a greedy,immature, selfish man and sponged off me until I left him. If it wasn't for this system in place I would be unable to take my daughter abroad on hols or anything like this without his consent (which he never gave when I asked him to sign passport until I discovered there was a sole guardianship form for it). I am just wondering what everyone else's views are on this topic.

My view is it's disgusting how you've allowed your bitterness with one man to cause you to take pleasure from every man's suffering. I bet you wouldn't be so delighted if the actions of a minority of unfit mothers meant all women such as yourself lost access to their children.

Chocholic7 · 19-07-2011 07:32PM

I do agree with you SheFiend as I have seem mothers torture their ex partners not allowing them to see their child also. That of course is not fair on the fathers. However I think the majority of the time, the child is always better off in the care of the mother. My parents were married and seperated when I was 5. But whenever I went into my fathers place for the weekend, he would normally leave me unsupervised in the house while he went down to the local pub and he was in his mid 30's. Now my childs father is the same as our kid went to stay with him for a weekend but I got a call from his mother that night saying he went out with the lads and she had look after our kid, so it makes me think if most fathers are entitled to the responsibility of equal rights to childeren?? Given that of course some mothers are irresponsible too, but I think a lot of single fathers are just "not arsed" spending a full weekend with their kids as they would be rather be out on the piss. But as I said this is not all fathers, as one of my single male frds is an amazing dad to his kid so I do admire the fathers that do make an effort to their kids

ElleEm · 19-07-2011 07:32PM

FATHERS should have equal rights to their children.
It is absurd that in this day and age, men have to FIGHT for their children. It makes no sense to me.

Chocholic7 · 19-07-2011 07:38PM

I am not anti-men Stark it's only a discussion I just wondering peoples views. I didn't say it should never come in to play that father's should not have equal rights, I was saying in my case I am glad my ex doesnt coz he is a dead beat dad, as was my own father and a few of my uncles so it's not based on one man and I do know some unmarried fathers are amazing to their kids and I do admire them and am glad that they are out their so I am not judgemental at all in the matter, just most single mums have trouble with their ex's with maintanance, seeing their kids etc. Apologies if I have offened you in any way as this was not my intention

Halo Kitty · 19-07-2011 07:39PM

I feel that father should play a part in their childrens lives....and that the majority of men now adays are well capable and willing to do so....First and foremost the welfare of the child is what is important, and not the blinkered emotions of adults who refuse to look at the bigger pictures....

January · 19-07-2011 07:40PM

Moved to Humanties, the Parenting forum is for advice on parenting, not debates on what rights parents should/shouldn't have.

saa · 19-07-2011 07:41PM

I'm glad you're delighted because children I know like many others were left alone with a abusive mother because the father could not get custody, spent five years trying to get to court was rejected for a lack of evidence.

Those children are still there today living with their abusive mother because the father didn't have to right to do anything about it.

Yes glad you're happy anyway..

SheFiend · 19-07-2011 07:45PM

Chocholic7 wrote: »

However I think the majority of the time, the child is always better off in the care of the mother.

I disagree. Without ststistics, which can be flawed anyway, we have no way of knowing if the majority of women are better parents than men.
Since we can't know this, it would be best to favour neither party and grant equal rights / access to the child automatically.
Then if a woman or man wants to dispute a parent having access, by all means go to court. I've seen some nasty women who are truly unfit mothers, raising their kids in houses with drug-taking, violence, etc. and father's heartbroken that they cannot even see the child, nevermind take them away from that enviroment.

Chocholic7 · 19-07-2011 07:47PM

Of course I dont agree with that Saa I think that is sick and the mother in that case should let the father take the childeren as it's obviously not a safe environment they are in. The childeren should always come first.

Justask · 19-07-2011 07:52PM

What about the mothers who have to fight for their kids to see the fathers when the fathers dont want to know.:mad:

Not all father deserve equal rights.

gargleblaster · 19-07-2011 07:53PM

Chocholic7 wrote: »

It's now 2011 and unmarried fathers still don't have equal rights. In my case, I am delighted,

That's just incredibly insensitive. Whatever your particular case is, to be delighted that all fathers don't have equal rights is undeniably unfair and sexist.

These laws end up hurting kids first and foremost, my heart breaks for them and for their fathers who are denied the chance to be there for them when it's so important, while they're young. It's nothing short of a tragedy.

Stark · 19-07-2011 07:53PM

Chocaholic14 wrote:

Of course I dont agree with that Saa I think that is sick and the mother in that case should let the father take the childeren as it's obviously not a safe environment they are in. The childeren should always come first.

But without fathers having rights (a situation which you've clearly stated you're delighted with), the father can't take the children away and so the abuse goes on.

saa · 19-07-2011 07:54PM

Chocholic7 wrote: »

Of course I dont agree with that Saa I think that is sick and the mother in that case should let the father take the childeren as it's obviously not a safe environment they are in. The childeren should always come first.

The mother needs treatments obviously because she is an abusive person, but that would mean she would have to give consent for that and her children.. she won't so this is where the rights of the father and the courts come in
oh wait they don't

I know who would, but to say you're really glad in your case and that mothers are better people to care for the children is all based on your experience,

the way the system is set up is based on the idea that well most of the time the mother seems to be less problematic, the issue is what happens when the mother is not the best person

This is why the rights of the father should be there, if he's a no good father the chances are he won't go through the courts to fight to see the child.

goose2005 · 19-07-2011 07:56PM

Chocholic7 wrote: »

I do agree with you SheFiend as I have seem mothers torture their ex partners not allowing them to see their child also. That of course is not fair on the fathers. However I think the majority of the time, the child is always better off in the care of the mother. My parents were married and seperated when I was 5. But whenever I went into my fathers place for the weekend, he would normally leave me unsupervised in the house while he went down to the local pub and he was in his mid 30's. Now my childs father is the same as our kid went to stay with him for a weekend but I got a call from his mother that night saying he went out with the lads and she had look after our kid, so it makes me think if most fathers are entitled to the responsibility of equal rights to childeren?? Given that of course some mothers are irresponsible too, but I think a lot of single fathers are just "not arsed" spending a full weekend with their kids as they would be rather be out on the piss. But as I said this is not all fathers, as one of my single male frds is an amazing dad to his kid so I do admire the fathers that do make an effort to their kids

Yes, I can understand. I personally was once mugged by a black man, and it got me thinking, should blacks be automatically allowed out at night if they're going to rob people? Maybe they should have to petition the court for permission to break curfew.

Chocholic7 · 19-07-2011 07:58PM

Im glad my childs father doesnt have any rights as he was abusive to both our kid and I. I don;t mean every father in Ireland as Of course there should be rights to fathers too, where if the mother was abusive to the child the father could take the kids. I am not trying to start an argument, I am just in two minds about it and just wondering what everyone else thinks thats all

saa · 19-07-2011 08:04PM

Everyone should have their rights until they cease to uphold their responsibilities, not by default.

The Internet Explorer · 19-07-2011 08:09PM

Fathers are humans too. Marriage is merely a signed piece of paper. It should not affect a fathers rights. You don't see other animals acting in this absurd manner. It is entirely natural for a father (animal) to be with his child (young). I mean seriously, WTF. No seriously. What the...........I don't even..

Dudess · 19-07-2011 08:45PM

Of course they should - apart from when they are unfit parents, but an unfit parent can be a woman OR a man, so it's their character that should be the decider in those cases, not their gender.

The way things stand for unmarried fathers in this regard is absolutely outrageous in Ireland.

Justask wrote: »

What about the mothers who have to fight for their kids to see the fathers when the fathers dont want to know.:mad:

Not all father deserve equal rights.

No, and not all mothers do either.

Chocholic7 wrote: »

However I think the majority of the time, the child is always better off in the care of the mother.

Why? The majority of the time, I think the child is better off being in the care of each parent an equal amount of time.

I think a lot of single fathers are just "not arsed" spending a full weekend with their kids as they would be rather be out on the piss.

You "think" it... that's about it.

Chocholic7 wrote: »

most single mums have trouble with their ex's with maintanance, seeing their kids etc.

Again, this is just something you're putting out there, but nothing solid to substantiate it.

gargleblaster wrote: »

These laws end up hurting kids first and foremost, my heart breaks for them and for their fathers who are denied the chance to be there for them when it's so important, while they're young. It's nothing short of a tragedy.

Exactly. What about the child who wants their father in their life?

SheFiend · 19-07-2011 10:44PM

saa wrote: »

Everyone should have their rights until they cease to uphold their responsibilities, not by default.[/QUOTE]
Exactly

susiebubbles · 19-07-2011 11:15PM

It's demoralising for guys having to fight to see their kids when the advice most of them will get is that the mother will usually "win". Maintenance is a separate issue and while I can understand why a mother would be angry if she is not getting it as agreed it is still not a reason to block access. It takes two people to make a child and if a woman is having sex with a man totally unsuitable to be a father then she should accept some accountability for the repercussions of this. If someone is a d*ck when bumping uglies, a child is unlikely to change his behaviour.

I've seen how difficult woman can make access (my mother and brother's ex gf) and it's heartbreaking for the children, the father and the father's family.

So yes I do think unmarried fathers should have equal rights. It is unreasonable to judge the bad behaviour of one and universally apply it to all.

Offy · 19-07-2011 11:30PM

We should have equal rights and equally women should be allowed vote! What a really silly post OP.

Jimmy Iovine · 19-07-2011 11:45PM

This is one of those great threads where 99% of the respondents will be in opposition to the OP's view on the matter, and rightly so.

Undoubtedly a mother will have an obvious and legitimate emotional connection with her child because of the whole birth process. I don't think that this should have any baring on her claim that she should have sole custody of the child, though. Without the male there would be no child and as such that, in my mind, should mean that the father has the right to be with his child regardless of the protestations of the mother.

I think what another poster said before me sums it up perfectly, "everyone should have their rights until they cease to uphold their responsibilities, not by default."

All I can say is I hope that I never find myself in a situation like this. It's not one that is pretty at all.

titanium feather · 19-07-2011 11:58PM

To go back to the thread title. Why on earth shouldn't unmarried fathers have equal rights?!

A marriage is essentially just a piece of paper. Creating a whole new life - that's a much bigger thing, much more important. In my opinion, in an ideal world, whether two people are single, in a relationship, married, divorced, whatever ... none of this should affect their relationship with their own child, their own flesh and blood.

Does your own child's father want access to him, as a matter of interest? Because, if he does, and if you're allowing your own attitude towards him interfere with his relationship with his daughter ... well, I find that very sad that you're taking the outdated law in this country to your advantage, to be honest.

smiles302 · 20-07-2011 12:10AM

Firstly

Everyone should have their rights until they cease to uphold their responsibilities, not by default.

< Completely agree with this statement.

But I do wonder on practical day to day terms. Assuming the mother and father are equally capable of caring for the child and they separate during the pregnancy, would/should the courts/society take the ability to breast-feed into account when choosing who is best to care for the child?
If it's decided that custody is exactly equal, do we offer preference to the mother immediately after child-birth? If for example the father gets every second week, is it reasonable to ask a mother to hand over a baby a week after giving birth?
Child birth is expected to be a very emotional potentially traumatic experience.

I am aware these are the more extreme end of complicated issues new parents could face but I can't imagine how to find a clear balance between the father's, mother's and child's rights that you could manage to write into law.

(In saying that I do agree it should be done, I just can't imagine how it would be done)

Zombrex · 20-07-2011 01:16PM

Fathers should have to apply, as they do now, for guardianship responsibility for their children. They should have a right to do this, but not automatic guardianship of their children by default without going through this process.

Speaking as a child born to unmarried parents, the idea that my biological father, who left to go to England before I was born, could have just turned up and had guardianship over me when I was born, or 6 months, a year, 2 years, is terrifying. He had zero interest in raising me, so why should the State consider him a guardian?

The interests of the child must come first, and it is in the interests of the child that the father demonstrate, through the application process, that they are interested in being a guardian of their children, that they are interested in participating in the raising of the child, that they are interested in being part of the child's life. This is not automatic and thus guardianship should not be automatic.

I find it disgusting how some people want to turn this issue into a male vs female war of the sexes type discussion, oh look how much better women have it.

In reality it has nothing to do with that, the issue if between the father, the State and the child. The mother is irrelevant to the question of the State ensuring the father is interested in raising their children.

The State has a responsibility to the child to ensure that those it recognizes as guardians of that child have an interest in the child. A father has a responsibility to demonstrate to the State that he has an interest in his child. How inconvenient this is for the father is irrelevant to the principle, though of course the State should ensure that any interested fathers can do this as quickly and easily as possible.

SheFiend · 20-07-2011 06:35PM

smiles302 wrote: »

Firstly < Completely agree with this statement.

But I do wonder on practical day to day terms. Assuming the mother and father are equally capable of caring for the child and they separate during the pregnancy, would/should the courts/society take the ability to breast-feed into account when choosing who is best to care for the child?
If it's decided that custody is exactly equal, do we offer preference to the mother immediately after child-birth? If for example the father gets every second week, is it reasonable to ask a mother to hand over a baby a week after giving birth?
Child birth is expected to be a very emotional potentially traumatic experience.

I am aware these are the more extreme end of complicated issues new parents could face but I can't imagine how to find a clear balance between the father's, mother's and child's rights that you could manage to write into law.

(In saying that I do agree it should be done, I just can't imagine how it would be done)

Good points here! I imagine it shouldn't be too difficult to determine a period of time after childbirth during which there will be joint custody but mother retains the child for the duration, with father visitation / access untill the end of that period?

SheFiend · 20-07-2011 06:43PM

Wicknight wrote: »

Speaking as a child born to unmarried parents, the idea that my biological father, who left to go to England before I was born, could have just turned up and had guardianship over me when I was born, or 6 months, a year, 2 years, is terrifying. He had zero interest in raising me, so why should the State consider him a guardian?

The interests of the child must come first, and it is in the interests of the child that the father demonstrate, through the application process, that they are interested in being a guardian of their children, that they are interested in participating in the raising of the child, that they are interested in being part of the child's life. This is not automatic and thus guardianship should not be automatic.

It could just as easily have been your mother who disappeared. If so, and if your father wasn't automatically guardian then you would be an orphan! :eek:

Why does the father have to prove this in a court of law, but the mother doesn't?
Why do you think men should be treated different to women? That IS sexism. It's sexist opinions like this that are making this a gender issue.

barry711 · 20-07-2011 07:32PM

I think it is an unfair and unjustified law. I wouldn't be surprised if this attributed as to why a lot of young males from poorer areas of this country who grow up without father figures in their lives go onto commit crimes and turn into criminals. With more families "breaking up" before they parents get married thanks to the stress on the partners from this recession it is going to create more kids getting born into single unmarried mothers and so the cycle continues. Just my thoughts

Should unmarried fathers have equal rights??

Comments