Giving up rights to a child

patrick2007

Hi everybody,

I think this is the right place for this one so here goes,
A friend was in a relationship with a woman who was married but told my friend she was leaving the husband, my friend and this woman had a child. While she was pregnant she told my friend she was going back to the husband and told my friend she had a miss carriage. My friend found out that there was infact a child and went after visitations etc which he was granted as a DNA test proved he was the dad. This woman made life hell for my friend as the baby was always asleep during these visits and the ignorance that her family showed was unbelievable to say the least. For that reason and a few others that I dont need to say anything about but are related my friend has decided to give up his rights to the child and she has also agreed to this. I would like to add that decision has not come easy for m,y friend.They are in court in January to get this all sorted out, I believe its called a discharge, if its called something else apoligies..
My question is this, does a discharge include that the child will have no claim to any inheritance in the future? Or does my friend need to ask for this as a special condition?
Any advise or even previous experience would be greatfull.

P.

killwill

Well giving up rights to your flesh and blood is just cold. He is taking the easy way out. I believe he should be doing everything possible to get on with the mother and her family for the of his child. Maybe I'm just old fashioned???

patrick2007

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.

silja

By giving up his parental rights, he severs all legal connection to the child, so will not be obligated to pay child support etc, and the child will not be entitled to a share of his estate later. Presumably the husband of the mother will then adopt the child legally, thus making him the legal father of the child.

Carrigart Exile

I would advise your friend to 'write a letter' to his child and keep it somewhere safe to produce 20 years from now when that child appears on his doorstep

TequilaMockingBird

Babies sleep. Alot. Should the child have been woken for these visitations?!

Imo, if the father is willing to give up his child so completely then he should do so now, for the sake of the child, and please God, the child can have a decent male role model in their life.

Sorry for going a little off topic.

SerialComplaint

silja wrote: »

the child will not be entitled to a share of his estate later.

I would be very surprised if any decision made by the father affects the child's entitlements. Whatever about the father giving up his rights, who says that the child is choosing to give up his/her rights? Is there any legal basis for the child losing inheritance rights or other rights in this way?

Kildrought

my friend has decided to give up his rights to the child

I'm a bit confused here... the parents in question weren't married (to each other at any rate), so the only person who has legal guardianship is the mother (I'm assuming he has not applied for it).

So what 'rights' does he believe he is 'giving up'?

Carrigart Exile

Kildrought wrote: »

I'm a bit confused here... the parents in question weren't married (to each other at any rate), so the only person who has legal guardianship is the mother (I'm assuming he has not applied for it).

So what 'rights' does he believe he is 'giving up'?

well given teh fact he had a DNA test done it would sound like it has gone down a considerable road; its a terrible indictment on society that this mother can behave in such a way that effectively bars a father from his child yet no action is taken. If she kept her child from attending school she would eventually be jailed, but it appears she can act with impunity with regard to one of the child's key relationships.

Kildrought

Carrigart Exile, interesting though that may be - it doesn't really answer the question - what 'rights' does this man believe he is 'giving up'?

Ph3n0m

Aye, speaking as a non-married, single father - you have no rights when it boils down it. Unless the parents are married to each other, then custody/guardianship/right to the child go to the mother automatically.

The father would need to go to court to get rights/access to the child

*Page*

I'm very confused...

Why is he taking it out on his child?

Why give up his only hope to have a say in his childs life!!!

the mother is probably very bitter but the fact your friend gets to be in the same room as the child is great lots of fathers dont get this far.

Baby's do sleep alot and the mother might be putting the baby down intentinaly but soon enough that baby will be a toddler then a child then a teenager...

Give your friend a slap for me and tell him to grow a set and be a part of the childs life.

I also think that if you give up your rights your child is still intiltled to in heritance and also i think if he's doing it to get out of paying up i think he may still have to. but then again i am no solicitor or judge so dont take my ideas on maintanince and rights to heart!

metrovelvet

Is the mother still married to her husband? If so the husband has full paternal rights and responsibilities to the child. How can your friend give up rights unless he was granted them in the first place by the mother?

Babies sleep alot. Complaining that the baby is asleep when he visits is pure selfishness.

Your story sounds fishy.

The Corinthian

killwill wrote: »

Well giving up rights to your flesh and blood is just cold. He is taking the easy way out. I believe he should be doing everything possible to get on with the mother and her family for the of his child. Maybe I'm just old fashioned???

I assume you would say the same of mothers who have abortions or give up their children for adoption, or are you saying this only of fathers?

As to the original question, some countries do have an option to vacate paternity, but as far as I know this is not technically possible in Ireland. A discharge can only take place once the child has reached 18 (23 if in full time education and never if handicapped) and any private agreement for same would not be recognized in Irish law. It's the same situation as with prenups in Ireland.

However, if one was signed it would be considered in any future maintenance, inheritance, guardianship, access or custody disputes as a mitigating factor.

I can empathize the father's situation however. Some fathers simply don't want to be fathers and had they been women would have taken a flight to the UK. And some fathers even if they are willing to try can have their lives made a living Hell by the mothers to the point of fearing for their own health.

themadchef

People mature, babies grow up...quickly! My adivce would be to seek legal guardianship. Surely as D.N.A proves he's the father he must have some part to play in the babies future?

Fight, fight, fight, if it's truly what your friend wants.

Ph3n0m

themadchef wrote: »

Surely as D.N.A proves he's the father he must have some part to play in the babies future?

Do you mean from a legal standpoint - then the answer is still no. However if he wants to be part of the baby's life, he has to fight for it - legal or joint gaurdianship, visitation rights, maintenance, etc

All of this can be doing by contacting the people in my sig

Quality

That poor child, Imagining growing up knowing that your biological father did not want anything to do with you. That your father made a concious decision to cut himself out of your life.

In this day and age there is no excuse. He should be ashamed of himself.

Going ahead with this is a life time decision. In 5, 10, 15 years time is he going to feel like he has made the biggest mistake of his life?

The Corinthian

Again I'd have to ask people like Quality or killwill, whether they would say the same of mothers who choose to have abortions or put their children up for adoption or if men need to follow a higher moral standard than women.

People are not salmon. There is ultimately no obligation for people to literally destroy their lives because they have become pregnant or had a child. That's why we have the "woman's right to choose" after all (including adoption). The man discussed in this thread is in a situation whereby his life is being made a misery and will continue to be made one - one could hardly damn him if he did finally give up the ghost.

However, this is Ireland and he can't actually discharge himself, even if he has the mother's consent. Were he and she to sign anything, all it would mean is that it would mitigate in terms of awarding access, maintenance and the like - it would not prevent any of those things. It is also advisable that he speak with a solicitor on this as it is also possible that he would essentially give up his rights but still be liable. Finally inheritance would probably not be affected as the child will not have signed anything and could sue on that basis.

the_syco

There's sleeping, and then there's "sleeping", the latter being that the child is awake, but the father is denied access, with the "sleeping" an excuse to bar the father the chance to see his child.

patrick2007 wrote:

constant court dates, solicitors letters, extremely difficult visitations

For the people who thinks that the father is giving up without a fight: the father cannot get access, or the baby is "asleep" when he comes over. Under current law, he'd have to pay the mother money, but after a long fight, he's come to realize he'll get nothing out of it.

And for the "rights" he is giving up, it's the right to be the babys' father.

metrovelvet

The Corinthian wrote: »

People are not salmon. There is ultimately no obligation for people to literally destroy their lives because they have become pregnant or had a child. That's why we have the "woman's right to choose" after all (including adoption). The man discussed in this thread is in a situation whereby his life is being made a misery and will continue to be made one - one could hardly damn him if he did finally give up the ghost.

.

I had never considered suicide as an option for walking, and one open to mothers and fathers.

Nevyn

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.

Quality

This is not an argument on abortion or adoption, this is an argument based on a child.

This man is considering cutting all ties from his flesh and blood. HELLO PEOPLE!!! Where are the family values gone in this country, I am sick to death of men not taking there responsibility when it comes to their children.

What sort of MAN gives up the right to his child? We are living in the Naughtys, Life isnt meant to be easy!!! You have to fight for everything you get.


Maybe this child is better off without this sort of father.

Ph3n0m

sick to death of "some" men, I hope - not all of us ride off into the sunset

Nevyn

Honestly it sounds more like in this case that the mother and her husband and thier families are squeezing him out of the picture so that they can play happy families and pretend that the break in the relationship never happened never mind that her husband is not the father of her child.

Quality

Ph3n0m wrote: »

sick to death of "some" men, I hope - not all of us ride off into the sunset

My apologies.

The Corinthian

Quality wrote: »

This man is considering cutting all ties from his flesh and blood. HELLO PEOPLE!!! Where are the family values gone in this country, I am sick to death of men not taking there responsibility when it comes to their children.

And what of women "not taking there responsibility when it comes to their children" because they put them up for adoption or abort them? It that an OK form of rejection?

You don't think you might be applying a couple of double standards there?

embee

Quality wrote: »

I am sick to death of men not taking there responsibility when it comes to their children.

Should he take on board the "responsibility" of paying maintenance but never being allowed to see his own child? Should he really pay for the upkeep of a child who will be a stranger to him? The mother of this child in this instance is bang out of order.

Frankly, I'm sick to death of unmarried mothers* who treat their children's fathers like this.





*I'm an unmarried mother myself, just before I get accused of having a problem with single mothers.

Quality

The Corinthian wrote: »

And what of women "not taking there responsibility when it comes to their children" because they put them up for adoption or abort them? It that an OK form of rejection?

You don't think you might be applying a couple of double standards there?

As I said in my earlier comment which you edited. "this is not a discussion on abortion or adoption." This is about this thread which in fact is about a young child. The fact that a father feels compelled to give up the right to his child.



If you would like my comments on abortion and adoption please make new post, I would be more than happy to contribute my personal feelings on the matter....

The Corinthian

Quality wrote: »

As I said in my earlier comment which you edited. "this is not a discussion on abortion or adoption." This is about this thread which in fact is about a young child. The fact that a father feels compelled to give up the right to his child.

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?

metrovelvet

embee wrote: »

Should he take on board the "responsibility" of paying maintenance but never being allowed to see his own child? Should he really pay for the upkeep of a child who will be a stranger to him? The mother of this child in this instance is bang out of order.

problem with single mothers.

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

*Page*

embee wrote: »

Should he take on board the "responsibility" of paying maintenance but never being allowed to see his own child? Should he really pay for the upkeep of a child who will be a stranger to him? The mother of this child in this instance is bang out of order.

Frankly, I'm sick to death of unmarried mothers* who treat their children's fathers like this.





*I'm an unmarried mother myself, just before I get accused of having a problem with single mothers.

i totally agree with you

I'm an unmarried mother myself and the things i have to do so i dont get tarred with that brush it so frustrating...

I have a huge issue with a certain breed of single parents(both fathers and mothers), i really wish people would one their eyes and see the child in the middle...

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.