Unmarried fathers

Fromthetrees

The position of an unmarried father in Ireland is quite precarious. The legislation governing this area is over 30 years old. In short, the legal position of an unmarried father in Ireland is that he has no automatic legal rights in respect of his children. I think this is extremely unfair and if the roles were reversed and mothers were denied automatic rights and guardianship of their children there would be uproar internationally. Why is this the case? Personally, I have a child outside of wedlock and the mother refuses to sign or grant anything because she 'doesn't want to be tied down to Ireland', I have the child 50% of the week and do every single thing she does, why am I being discriminated against because of my sex and my marital status?

Morag

If you have the child and you wish guardianship and the mother will not willingly sign for to you have it then you can apply to the courts and have it granted with her her signing anything.

Fromthetrees

Oh I know but going to court is hardly ideal is it, it will upset the mother being brought to court and as our current situation is just fine I've left it off thus far as not to rock the boat, I just find it ridiculously unfair especially as not having automatic guardianship is the default situation for any unmarried father regardless of history or situation, I will go to court but only because I have to and I really don't want to.

January

Moved to Humanities

Morag

I agree the system is very flawed and you should be able to seek guardianship of your child with out the other parent blocking you or threatening to make thing awkward for you and your child.

Justask

So you think that every father should have automatic rights?

A father who never see's his kids, doesn't support them in any way?

There are a massive amount of fathers around like this.

Morag

The misdeeds of a few should not negate the rights of the many.

Orion

Justask wrote: »

So you think that every father should have automatic rights?

Yes. It ties in perfectly with automatic duties. Just because those duties aren't enforced doesn't mean that the majority of fathers who do honour their duties have no rights.

Fromthetrees

Justask wrote: »

So you think that every father should have automatic rights?

A father who never see's his kids, doesn't support them in any way?

There are a massive amount of fathers around like this.

I think every father should be treated the same way as every mother, it's called equality, do you not agree with this? Obviously there are exceptions but this is the rule. It's not right.
I'm sorry but do you have statistics that support your claim? Every unmarried father I'm friends with or have come across are not at all like this, they do 50% of everything relating to their children, in many cases more, at the very most what you're saying is that it is still only a small minority, why should my rights be discriminated against because of a minority, I'm sure there are a minority of mothers out there that are **** parents, it doesn't prove anything.

Justask

Fromthetrees wrote: »

I think every father should be treated the same way as every mother, it's called equality, do you not agree with this? Obviously there are exceptions but this is the rule. It's not right.
I'm sorry but do you have statistics that support your claim? Every unmarried father I'm friends with or have come across are not at all like this, they do 50% of everything relating to their children, in many cases more, at the very most what you're saying is that it is still only a small minority, why should my rights be discriminated against because of a minority, I'm sure there are a minority of mothers out there that are **** parents, it doesn't prove anything.

I asked a question

What claim did I make to need statistics

Enjoy you evening

Justask

Justask wrote: »

I asked a question

What claim did I make to need statistics

There are a massive amount of fathers around like this.

.

Justask

bluewolf wrote: »

.

Tut silly me

lol

Fromthetrees

A father who never see's his kids, doesn't support them in any way?

There are a massive amount of fathers around like this.

You're making a claim basically saying there are a load of **** men who don't give a **** about there kids, I just want to read the statistics that prove this.

Justask

Fromthetrees wrote: »

A father who never see's his kids, doesn't support them in any way?

There are a massive amount of fathers around like this.

You're making a claim basically saying there are a load of **** men who don't give a **** about there kids, I just want to read the statistics that prove this.

You dont have to high light what i said the 'Quote' button is there for that

I dont have figures for you, but they are around (maybe I shouldnt have used the word massve) sorry about that
Just cause I dont agree with you does not make my opnion wrong.

Fromthetrees

Justask wrote: »

You dont have to high light what i said the 'Quote' button is there for that

I dont have figures for you, but they are around (maybe I shouldnt have used the word massve) sorry about that
Just cause I dont agree with you does not make my opnion wrong.

Well it's an opinion about equality and any right minded person would find an opinion opposed to equality ridiculous quite frankly unless you're say a man living in Afghanistan. You shouldn't tar all men with the same brush, it's not done if you're a traveler, if you've got different colored skin ect., so why should it be different when it comes to a man getting automatic guardianship over his own child, it should be a more fundamental right than anything as it's more important.

rolly1

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Oh I know but going to court is hardly ideal is it, it will upset the mother being brought to court and as our current situation is just fine I've left it off thus far as not to rock the boat, I just find it ridiculously unfair especially as not having automatic guardianship is the default situation for any unmarried father regardless of history or situation, I will go to court but only because I have to and I really don't want to.

So she wants to,potentially, be able to remove yer child permanently from the country at the drop of a hat and you don't want to rock the boat?

What the hell are you DOING blathering on about fathers rights on a website when this possibility exists?

GROW A PAIR AND GET GUARDIANSHIP MAN!

Fromthetrees

rolly1 wrote: »

So she wants to,potentially, be able to remove yer child permanently from the country at the drop of a hat and you don't want to rock the boat?

What the hell are you DOING blathering on about fathers rights on a website when this possibility exists?

GROW A PAIR AND GET GUARDIANSHIP MAN!

Thanks for that:). I've already applied for free legal aid to go to court a few weeks ago and it takes a few months for it to actually happen. TBH I don't see her leaving in the next few months, she just wants it as an option, the other main reason why I want to get it is if she marries a guy, any guy, he would be the legal father of my daughter, when I heard that was the kick up the hole I needed to actually get pro active about it.

Moonbeam

He would have to legally adopt her and you would need to grant permission and give up any rights you have.

In Ireland it often seems to me that the only rights for an unmarried father is the right to pay maintenance.

tallaghtmick

Justask wrote: »

So you think that every father should have automatic rights?

A father who never see's his kids, doesn't support them in any way?

There are a massive amount of fathers around like this.

So let me get this straight,are you saying fathers like myself and the OP should have no rights because of dead beat dads?

If thats your logic mothers should have no rights because other mothers ditch their kids in favour of the new fella they have.

Or did I read what you said totally wrong?

gargleblaster

Moonbeam wrote: »

He would have to legally adopt her and you would need to grant permission and give up any rights you have.

In Ireland it often seems to me that the only rights for an unmarried father is the right to pay maintenance.

There's obviously also the right to educate oneself about one's rights as a father.

Fromthetrees

Moonbeam wrote: »

He would have to legally adopt her and you would need to grant permission and give up any rights you have.

In Ireland it often seems to me that the only rights for an unmarried father is the right to pay maintenance.

You see I don't know, as in from what I've been told I have absolutely no rights at all today despite my name being on the birth cert., my daughter has my surname and has lived with me 3 days a week, sometimes 4 since the day she was born, well the first few months I just stayed over every night but that's not relevant, it's that the more I read about it and the more I talk to taxi drivers or talk drunk bollux in the pub the more I see there are so many men in a similar situation and how unfair it is.

Justask

tallaghtmick wrote: »

So let me get this straight,are you saying fathers like myself and the OP should have no rights because of dead beat dads?

If thats your logic mothers should have no rights because other mothers ditch their kids in favour of the new fella they have.

Or did I read what you said totally wrong?

You read it wrong.
Of course there ar fantastic dads out there but there are also dead beat ones.

I would stand by any dad who see's his child

I asked a question thats all :rolleyes:

Moonbeam

Fromthetrees wrote: »

You see I don't know, as in from what I've been told I have absolutely no rights at all today despite my name being on the birth cert., my daughter has my surname and has lived with me 3 days a week, sometimes 4 since the day she was born, well the first few months I just stayed over every night but that's not relevant, it's that the more I read about it and the more I talk to taxi drivers or talk drunk bollux in the pub the more I see there are so many men in a similar situation and how unfair it is.

Yes, there are a lot of reasons to be upset and to feel sorry for yourself but think of the positives, you see your kids regularly,you have a relationship with them and you can get guardianship of them through the courts.

There are a few lobby groups out there supporting unmarried fathers , I suggest contacting them and speak to other fathers in your situation.
Write to TDS, the situation will not change with out people trying to change it.

James Jones

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Thanks for that:). I've already applied for free legal aid to go to court a few weeks ago and it takes a few months for it to actually happen. TBH I don't see her leaving in the next few months, she just wants it as an option.

If she "just wants it as an option" then she is considering going and it could happen tomorrow. By refusing to grant you Guardianship, she seems to be more aware of her rights than you are of yours.
If you don't apply for Custody and Guardianship tomorrow, then she can take your child away on Saturday and you have NO RIGHTS. Read the European Judgement HERE and a post on Parentalequality.ie HERE.
Once you make the application, the Courts have jurisdiction and so the mother no longer has the option of leaving with your child. You do not have to wait for Legal Aid to make the application BUT you can have the case adjourned until you have organised representation.

rolly1

Steps for self represented standard guardianship application

1.Firstly Identify which court you wish to have the court hearing in. This can be in the District Court in which you live or the District court in which the mother lives. See here
2. You will need to download and complete a notice of application to apply for guardianship in the court. The form needed is this one
3.This form needs to be completed and sent to the mother and the court office at least 21 days before the court hearing. The courts have a set of rules around a thing called “Service”. Service is the method you use to ensure the mother gets the notice into her hands. The best way to do this by far is to send the completed form by prepaid registered post. This can be done at any post office
4.After service, a second completed notice of application from, together with a statutory declaration as to service, must be lodged with the District Court clerk at least two days before the court hearing.
5.The form for the statutory declaration of service is here. You will need to have a peace commissioner also sign the statutory declaration. There should be no charge for this but some do charge a small amount (€3-€10) for the signature. Your local Garda (police) station should be able to give you the name and address of a Peace Commissioner in your area. Contact information for all Garda stations in Ireland is available here. If you fail to get the name of your local peace commissioner from the local garda station ring and request the names from the department of justice here: Phone: + 353 1 602-8202
6.You must also attend in court on the day to make your application.
7.Where the District Court makes an order under the Act, the court clerk will give, or send by ordinary post, a copy of the order made to each person in whose favour or against whom the order was made.

Get your ass in gear, you now have NO excuse:)

Fromthetrees

I really appreciate the above advice, I knew large parts of what was there but didn't other bits so it's been a real help to me, thanks, the other bit I appreciate is that it's not just the few lads I grew up with or the odd person I talked to over a drink or in a cab that are the only people who know the story, men are being discriminated against seeing their flesh and blood and nobody seems to give the slightest ****, there is far more media attention given to gay adoption rights and although I fully support this it just makes me feel like **** when the Irish media give more care to non biological parents than actual biological parents, makes me hate this ****ing country and I love living here.

James Jones

Fromthetrees wrote: »

there is far more media attention given to gay adoption rights

Gay adoption will further the cause of bio-fathers. At some stage, two homosexuals who have adopted a child will split up and the obvious soloution would be shared parenting.

By the way, the media were all very supportive of the Law Reform Commission proposal to grant automatic guardianship to unmarried fathers but failed to mention that the LRC also proposed to downgrade guardianship for married fathers. Talk about a smoke screen!!!:mad:

Fromthetrees

James Jones wrote: »

Gay adoption will further the cause of bio-fathers. At some stage, two homosexuals who have adopted a child will split up and the obvious soloution would be shared parenting.

By the way, the media were all very supportive of the Law Reform Commission proposal to grant automatic guardianship to unmarried fathers but failed to mention that the LRC also proposed to downgrade guardianship for married fathers. Talk about a smoke screen!!!:mad:

It's all bull**** like, I don't want guardianship of my kid I want shared custody which is what I have in reality and it's the stupid outdated catholic traditions that's enshrined in our dinosaur system that's actually stopping reform, we're suppose to be a secular state in the first world, bring it on and stop the bollux. Catholic conservative Ireland should be buried where it belongs. 2011 it is.

OUTOFSYNC

You need to get guardianship.

You are in a horrible situation.. You currently have shared custody in practice with your kid - which is the best thing for her - but the other parent has complete control - if you apply for guardianship she might punish you using the kid as the weapon (if she's a good parent probably not) - but I think you have no choice...

James Jones

Fromthetrees wrote: »

it's the stupid outdated catholic traditions that's enshrined in our dinosaur system that's actually stopping reform, we're suppose to be a secular state in the first world, bring it on and stop the bollux. Catholic conservative Ireland should be buried where it belongs. 2011 it is.

I have to disagree with you, FTT. When a father is married in this country, he will be ignored as a parent regardless if he is living with his wife or not. If you are a father, you are deemed a 2nd class parent and are not required (surplus to requirements, so to speak).
At least unmarried fathers know they have no rights and its official that they have no rights but married dads? Well, that's the big pretence. You will hear a lot about so-called Constitutional Rights but all state authorities ignore those rights. Schools, the HSE and and any institution where consent is required.
At least the unmarried father knows where he stands.

Fromthetrees

James Jones wrote: »

I have to disagree with you, FTT. When a father is married in this country, he will be ignored as a parent regardless if he is living with his wife or not. If you are a father, you are deemed a 2nd class parent and are not required (surplus to requirements, so to speak).
At least unmarried fathers know they have no rights and its official that they have no rights but married dads? Well, that's the big pretence. You will hear a lot about so-called Constitutional Rights but all state authorities ignore those rights. Schools, the HSE and and any institution where consent is required.
At least the unmarried father knows where he stands.

I accept your point, I know very little about married fathers situations, I've been living in my own little bubble for twenty odd years and it's only since the issue of unmarried fathers having no rights has it become an issue to me, unfortunately this is probably the case for most people, which is a shame, why are men treated as 2nd class citizens when it comes to their children, over the past 20 years plus 'we' in this country have been supposedly striving for equality and the fundamental basics of a child having both their parents as equal partners in their growth, well being and health seems alien to the system. Given that most tds are male and have children why is it a total non issue and gay adoption (which I'm in favor of btw) is spoken about regularly in every facet of society. What the **** can we do about it?

James Jones

Fromthetrees wrote: »

I accept your point, I know very little about married fathers situations, I've been living in my own little bubble for twenty odd years and it's only since the issue of unmarried fathers having no rights has it become an issue to me, unfortunately this is probably the case for most people, which is a shame, why are men treated as 2nd class citizens when it comes to their children, over the past 20 years plus 'we' in this country have been supposedly striving for equality and the fundamental basics of a child having both their parents as equal partners in their growth, well being and health seems alien to the system. Given that most tds are male and have children why is it a total non issue and gay adoption (which I'm in favor of btw) is spoken about regularly in every facet of society. What the **** can we do about it?

Change will only occur when men like yourself try and make change happen. Even if not successful, I believe that its better to try and fail than fail to try. You can do this alone by discussing issues here where you can learn a lot from others which could help in the writing of letters to the paper and lobbying TD's. Don't just go in and talk to them. Get them to ask a Parliamentary Question of a Minister. Look through previous questions HERE for ideas. For example, ask "Does the Minister for Justice believe that the position of married fathers as Legal Guardians should be reduced to allow for the granting of Automatic Guardianship to Unmarried fathers, as recently proposed in the report Legal Aspects of Family Relationships by the Law Reform Commission"?

4.05 The Commission recommends that a general statutory requirement
to consult should not be included in legislation concerning parental
responsibility. The Commission recommends that the consent of all parties
exercising parental responsibility be required for the purpose of consenting to
irreversible non-essential medical procedures on behalf of the child.

page 44

You could also get involved with others such as the Mens Support Groups of Ireland.
Its not just an Irish issue and I thought, given that you have compared the gay adoption issue with that of fathers complete lack of rights, you might be interested in THIS ARTICLE.

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Given that most tds are male and have children why is it a total non issue?

Because the majority of TD's who are fathers spend most of the week in Dublin, returning to their rural constituencies at the weekend where they carry out clinics etc. This is almost impossible to do while playing a constructive role in the lives of their children and so they rely heavily on their wives to do this. They simply cannot understand the mind-set of a father who makes breakfast for his children, takes them to school and helps them with their homework in the evening. Judges are the same. Because of their work, a lot of which takes place away from home, they don't have the day-to-day involvement with their children that a father who works Mon-to-Fri 9-5 does and so they simply cannot grasp the concept that a father can be equal to a mother.

EDIT:Remember that we recently had a taoiseach who was a separated father. What did he do for fathers rights? Absolutely nothing cos he left all of the child caring responsibilities to his wife.

rolly1

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Given that most tds are male and have children why is it a total non issue and gay adoption (which I'm in favor of btw) is spoken about regularly in every facet of society. What the **** can we do about it?

The problem is that the gay community are not just seeking gay adoption, which the media has been incorrectly focused on, gay adoption is being used as the publicly acceptable trojan horse with which to sneak in a whole raft of changes which will tear assunder the few remaining rights of fathers and their children in this country.
The trojan horse tactics of using the "right-on progressive Ireland" type spin was used last year claiming that the Civil Partnership Act was all about giving gays rights, when under the cohabitation redress provisions of the same act "marriage by default" was foisted on an unsuspecting, uncritical, apathetic public of all cohabiting couples, whether heterosexual or homosexual. In terms of numbers alone the cohabitation provisions affected at least 120,000 cohabiting couples while the civil partnership element catered for something like 5000.

Some of the more millitant Gay non parents are now also seeking equal legal status with parents, even where two active loving parents are involved in their child's lives (In fairness there is a significant number of gay people who do not agree with this, but you will only ever hear the more active voices). I myself believe that, where possible, every child should know and be cared for by their mother and father, insisting on a third adult to come into this scenario is actually an abuse of the child's right to have their mother and father.
The women's groups have a common platform with the gay community on this as they are also seeking that their new husbands/partners get equal legal rights to the father of their children, so as to be able to legally outvote fathers on parenting decision's.

These changes are all there to see, both in Kathleen Lynch's Guardianship of Children Bill 2010 along with the Law Reform Commision's recommendations and draft bill in their report entitled "Legal Aspects of Family Relationships". "Parenting by committee" whereby 2 biological parents and 1 legal-construct parent all decide welfare/parenting issues is what is proposed in these bills. This of course would lead to even greater chaos for children; it's hard enough for separated parents to agree matters without bringing in another party to further increase the strife. Witness this case, where all three adults were gay and the result of parenting by committee has been a series of on-going court battles over the years.

But of course if it's 2 to1 in terms of legal votes, it's easy to see the advantages this set up has for mothers seeking to have their own way on all decisions relating to children..

The Australian article mentioned in the previous post is the writing on the wall for fathers in Ireland imo, unless Irish fathers start actively campaigning against these appalling provisions of the two above mentioned bills.

Guys constantly moan on about the situation, especially in message boards, but their energy would be far better spent actually doing something about it, like the practical advice outlined on this thread.

But in the meantime I would still urge you to focus on getting guardianship!

Fromthetrees

I've posted a thread for unmarried fathers (could also be for separated fathers) in the forum request section. If you support this idea or think you would contribute to a forum, sub forum or even a sticky then give it a +1. Thanks.

rolly1

To demonstrate the strong overlap between the feminist movement and the gay community behold "Rory's story" posted under "Promoting women's equality" on the National Women's Council of Ireland (NWCI) website.

http://www.nwci.ie/news/2011/09/07/marriage-equality-rorys-story-video/

The catchphrase is "Because no child deserves to be a stranger to their parents."

Saying no child deserves to be a stranger to their parents is a sick joke for the thousands of fathers being denied access to their own children throughout Ireland.

The oxford english dictionary describes a parent as " a person's father or mother"

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/parent

...so if the official meaning of a word doesn't suit, then make it suit, by lying.

Wiping men and fathers out of the picture in children's lives fits in seamlessly of course with the objectives of the NWCI.

Zombrex

Fromthetrees wrote: »

why am I being discriminated against because of my sex and my marital status?

Because the State is not satisfied that you are interested in guardianship of your child. They aren't satisfied of this because you haven't applied for guardianship of your child :rolleyes:

The courts and social services have a mandate to act in the best interests of the children involved. It is in the best interests of children that the State recognizes guardianship to those how are involved in the child's life.

It is assumed (rightly or wrongly) that married fathers are interested in raising children produced from that marriage.

It is not automatically assumed that fathers out of wedlock are interested in raising children they produce. It is not assumed they even know they have produced a child. Thus it is required that they demonstrate this awareness and interest to the State through the application for guardianship before the State recognizes them as guardians.

As others have mentioned this is to prevent the State recognizing guardianship of fathers who are not involved in the raising of their children.

It is a shame that your partner is refusing to sign a declaration this means you will have to apply to the courts. But I really can't see how you think this is rocking the boat more than appealing for a change in the law that would grant you the same thing?

Zombrex

rolly1 wrote: »

Saying no child deserves to be a stranger to their parents is a sick joke for the thousands of fathers being denied access to their own children throughout Ireland.

Where are you getting that figure from? The vast majority of unmarried fathers who apply for guardianship of their children are recognized with guardianship, something like 91%.

Zombrex

tallaghtmick wrote: »

So let me get this straight,are you saying fathers like myself and the OP should have no rights because of dead beat dads?

No, fathers like yourself and OP should have apply for guardianship because of dead beat dads.

Think of it this way, the vast majority of people drive perfectly safe on the roads of Ireland. So why does that state require you to apply for a license and take a driving test? Because of the tiny percentage of idiots who would wreak havoc if this system was not in place. This is true of most government systems.

The State does not know who you are and what your intentions are towards your child until you inform them. Heck the State does not even know you know you have a child until you inform them.

As such why would they recognize guardianship until that is the case? How could that possibly in the interest of the child, awarding guardianship to someone who may not even know they have a kid?

Just apply for guardianship. In the vast majority of cases this is a painless process and you are recognized with guardianship. The system exists for the small percentage that cause trouble, just like most government systems.

James Jones

Zombrex wrote: »

Fromthetrees wrote: »

Why am I being discriminated against because of my sex and my marital status?

Because the State is not satisfied that you are interested in guardianship of your child. They aren't satisfied of this because you haven't applied for guardianship of your child :rolleyes:
The courts and social services have a mandate to act in the best interests of the children involved.

If Social Services have a “mandate” to act in the best interests of the child, can you explain why they don’t? In the case reported on HERE, they claimed that

"the issue of including fathers in treatment options was not the norm at the time".

It still isn't "the norm". The above complaint resulted in THESE GUIDELINES being introduced but they are ignored.

Zombrex wrote: »

It is a shame that your partner is refusing to sign a declaration this means you will have to apply to the courts. But I really can't see how you think this is rocking the boat more than appealing for a change in the law that would grant you the same thing?

He can appeal for a change in the law by discussing it publicly here, writing to the newspapers and lobbying TD’s to put pressure on the Government. This will not affect his personal situation whereas if he applies for Guardianship, he will probably get it but his ex might stop him from seeing his kids. As Guardianship is widely ignored, it is questionable if he should bother applying for what is essentially a worthless piece of paper. The only advantage is that he will be in a position to stop his ex from bringing the children abroad.

Zombrex wrote: »

rolly1 wrote: »

Saying no child deserves to be a stranger to their parents is a sick joke for the thousands of fathers being denied access to their own children throughout Ireland.

Where are you getting that figure from? The vast majority of unmarried fathers who apply for guardianship of their children are recognized with guardianship, something like 91%.

You seem to be confusing access with guardianship. Access is the time that a non-custodial parent is allowed spend with their child. Guardianship is the legal relationship between a parent and child. An unmarried father who is not a Guardian can have as much access as he wants but cannot make important decisions for his child if he is not a guardian. In fact, he can have Joint Custody but still cannot make decisions. On the other hand, consent of a parent who is a Guardian is still required JOINTLY with the other parent even if that parent has NO ACCESS.
The 91% of successful applicants for Guardianship might be denied access and nothing is done about it.

Zombrex wrote: »

tallaghtmick wrote: »

So let me get this straight,are you saying fathers like myself and the OP should have no rights because of dead beat dads?

No, fathers like yourself and OP should have apply for guardianship because of dead beat dads.

Fathers like the OP and tallaghtmick should be able to apply for Guardianship without the other parent being allowed to oppose them. The act of application should give the state the knowledge that these men are stepping up to the plate and seeking to take on their share of responsibility. The mother should not be involved. It should be between the father and the State.

Zombrex wrote: »

Think of it this way, the vast majority of people drive perfectly safe on the roads of Ireland. So why does that state require you to apply for a license and take a driving test? Because of the tiny percentage of idiots who would wreak havoc if this system was not in place. This is true of most government systems.

When you take a driving test, it is between the state and the learner driver. No other citizen can appear at the test and be allowed to prevent a learner driver from being granted a driving licence.

Then again, a driving licence is generally respected by state authorities whereas a fathers Guardianship is not.

Zombrex

James Jones wrote: »

If Social Services have a “mandate” to act in the best interests of the child, can you explain why they don’t?

In the case reported on HERE, they claimed that It still isn't "the norm". The above complaint resulted in THESE GUIDELINES being introduced but they are ignored.

Ignored by who?

Do you agree that the guidelines reflect the mandate?

James Jones wrote: »

He can appeal for a change in the law by discussing it publicly here, writing to the newspapers and lobbying TD’s to put pressure on the Government. This will not affect his personal situation whereas if he applies for Guardianship, he will probably get it but his ex might stop him from seeing his kids.

How is that different to what might happen if he had automatic guardianship through a change in law?

James Jones wrote: »

As Guardianship is widely ignored, it is questionable if he should bother applying for what is essentially a worthless piece of paper. The only advantage is that he will be in a position to stop his ex from bringing the children abroad.

If you think guardianship is worthless it will make little different whether he applies for it through the courts or is granted it automatically.

James Jones wrote: »

You seem to be confusing access with guardianship.

I'm not.

James Jones wrote: »

Access is the time that a non-custodial parent is allowed spend with their child. Guardianship is the legal relationship between a parent and child.

Exactly. Guardianship is a recognition by the State. It is a legal standing of the guardians of the child as far as the State see it.

Which is why it is important that the State is aware of the father and his intentions. The easiest way to achieve this is through the father making himself known to the State through the application for guardianship.

If you can think of a better way that still fulfills this requirement I'm all ears.

James Jones wrote: »

The 91% of successful applicants for Guardianship might be denied access and nothing is done about it.

True but that is not an issue for the law with regard to guardianship.

James Jones wrote: »

The act of application should give the state the knowledge that these men are stepping up to the plate and seeking to take on their share of responsibility. The mother should not be involved. It should be between the father and the State.

It is between the father the child and the State. And the State cares what the views of the mother.

A mother objecting to guardianship is not an automatic rejection of guardianship. But the State's responsibility is to act in the interest of the child and the idea that the mothers views on the matter are irrelevant to the State's assessment is frankly ridiculous. It is up to the State to assess the validity of the mothers objections, if any. Refusing to hear them at all because of a vendata against mothers who have objected in the past is just stupid.

James Jones wrote: »

When you take a driving test, it is between the state and the learner driver. No other citizen can appear at the test and be allowed to prevent a learner driver from being granted a driving licence.

True, but there are plenty of examples where the State does take the views of other citizens into account, such as applying for planning permission.

The State cares about the views of others when they are deciding on something that will effect more than just you.

Despite common protests that guardianship is all about the father it is actually, from the State's position, all about the child. The State remember is acting in the interest of the child, not the father. It is in the interests of the child that the State is aware of any objections to guardianship from the mother or other close relatives.

James Jones wrote: »

Then again, a driving licence is generally respected by state authorities whereas a fathers Guardianship is not.

I'll have to take your word on that. Currently the law does not reflect that position, so your issue seems to be more with State agencies not following the law rather than the law itself. These are two separate issues, calling for a change of law seems redundant if the main objection is that agencies don't follow the law as it is.

rolly1

Zombrex wrote: »

Where are you getting that figure from? The vast majority of unmarried fathers who apply for guardianship of their children are recognized with guardianship, something like 91%.

From the guys I have talked to over the years, and the other guys who have talked to the guys...:)

Do you find the figures surprising?

This seems very strange for a person with so much to say about requesting the state to confer rights which should be there automatically.

Guardianship has nothing whatsoever to do with access, your figure means zip.

Zombrex

rolly1 wrote: »

Zombrex wrote: »

Where are you getting that figure from? The vast majority of unmarried fathers who apply for guardianship of their children are recognized with guardianship, something like 91%.

From the guys I have talked to over the years, and the other guys who have talked to the guys...:)

You don't think that is a poor way to get an accurate representation of the system as a whole.

Do you find the figures surprising?

You haven't presented figures, have you? It is an impression based on talking to a handful of fathers. Without actual statistics it is rather useless from the point of view of assessing extent of problems.

This seems very strange for a person with so much to say about requesting the state to confer rights which should be there automatically.

I'm not following, what is strange?

Guardianship has nothing whatsoever to do with access, your figure means zip.

True custody and guardianship are separate processes, but there is significant over lap. It seems some what unlikely that one would be largely free of significant bias and the other riddled with it. Are the handled by two completely separate State organizations?

rolly1

The state currently looks to the mother when deciding a guardianship application for an unmarried father; this is still no problem under an automatic guardianship scenario: let her contest his automatic guardianship to remove it if she has an issue with it!

Child's best interest still served, the wonderful state still upholds it's obligation in this regard, but lo and behold the fathers aren't all treated like a 1960's southern state black person..

If there is a dispute with regards to paternity, off to court with thee!
But of course for true equity the father should be able to remove the mother as guardian as well!

All father's should have automatic guardianship, the same as all mothers have automatic guardianship, everything else is just discrimination.


Anyone who says any differently is simply a first class bigot!

rolly1

Zombrex wrote: »

You don't think that is a poor way to get an accurate representation of the system as a whole.

Listen here Wicknight your bs from the last thread about being a family court judge of 15 years is still pretty sharp in my mind. I have little time for playing around with lying bigots.

Goodnight to you; you strange, strange person.

James Jones

James Jones wrote: »

If Social Services have a “mandate” to act in the best interests of the child, can you explain why they don’t? In the case reported on HERE, they claimed that It still isn't "the norm". The above complaint resulted in THESE GUIDELINES being introduced but they are ignored.

Zombrex wrote: »

Ignored by who?

Do you agree that the guidelines reflect the mandate?

Ignored by the HSE HERE, (only one signature required)
HERE

I have read and understand the fact sheet.
I CONSENT to be / for the above named child to be
vaccinated with two doses of a Pandemic (HINI) 2009
flu vaccine.
Signature :
(Self/Mother/Father/Legal Guardian)

(only one signature required)
and HERE.

New guidance is being developed and legal advice has been sought by the HSE, following concern over a lack of consistency with regard to the issue of consent from separated parents between national guidelines developed by the HSE and those being operated by individual hospitals at local level.

The Guidelines reflect the law (not exactly sure what you mean by "mandate") but they are now ignoring their own guidelines.

James Jones wrote: »

If Social Services have a “mandate” to act in the best interests of the child, can you explain why they don’t? In the case reported on HERE, they claimed that It still isn't "the norm". The above complaint resulted in THESE GUIDELINES being introduced but they are ignored.

I note your failure to answer my question.

James Jones wrote: »

He can appeal for a change in the law by discussing it publicly here, writing to the newspapers and lobbying TD’s to put pressure on the Government. This will not affect his personal situation whereas if he applies for Guardianship, he will probably get it but his ex might stop him from seeing his kids.

Zombrex wrote: »

How is that different to what might happen if he had automatic guardianship through a change in law?

His ex will be unaware of his discussing it publicly here, writing to the newspapers and lobbying TD’s but if he applies to Court, she has to be served with notice. So, he can work away in the background and she will be unaware and so won't stop him seeing his kids if the law is changed but she MIGHT stop him if he goes to Court and there is nothing he can do about it.

Zombrex wrote: »

If you think guardianship is worthless it will make little different whether he applies for it through the courts or is granted it automatically.

That depends on people like me continuing to lobby TD's to make sure the law is implemented.

Zombrex wrote: »

James Jones wrote: »

Zombrex wrote: »

rolly1 wrote: »

Saying no child deserves to be a stranger to their parents is a sick joke for the thousands of fathers being denied access to their own children throughout Ireland.

Where are you getting that figure from? The vast majority of unmarried fathers who apply for guardianship of their children are recognized with guardianship, something like 91%.

You seem to be confusing access with guardianship. Access is the time that a non-custodial parent is allowed spend with their child. Guardianship is the legal relationship between a parent and child. An unmarried father who is not a Guardian can have as much access as he wants but cannot make important decisions for his child if he is not a guardian. In fact, he can have Joint Custody but still cannot make decisions. On the other hand, consent of a parent who is a Guardian is still required JOINTLY with the other parent even if that parent has NO ACCESS.
The 91% of successful applicants for Guardianship might be denied access and nothing is done about it.

I'm not.

Oh but you ARE. You said "The vast majority of unmarried fathers who apply for guardianship of their children are recognized with guardianship, something like 91%" in direct reply to rolly1 who said "Saying no child deserves to be a stranger to their parents is a sick joke for the thousands of fathers being denied access to their own children throughout Ireland".
Rolly1 claimed 1000's of fathers were denied "ACCESS" and you made a statement about "GUARDIANSHIP". Don't worry, its a common mistake.

Zombrex wrote: »

it is important that the State is aware of the father and his intentions. The easiest way to achieve this is through the father making himself known to the State through the application for guardianship.

I agree. Let them apply but don't let it have to be on the mothers terms. If she wants to stop him being a guardian, let her apply to Court and if she has good reason, the Court will take that into consideration.

Zombrex wrote: »

A mother objecting to guardianship is not an automatic rejection of guardianship. But the State's responsibility is to act in the interest of the child and the idea that the mothers views on the matter are irrelevant to the State's assessment is frankly ridiculous. It is up to the State to assess the validity of the mothers objections, if any. Refusing to hear them at all because of a vendata against mothers who have objected in the past is just stupid.

The mothers views are not irrelevant and no-one said they were. The State can take the view that unmarried fathers cannot be Guardians automatically and force them to go to Court and grant them Guardianship in over 97.5% of cases that go to hearing ( as reported by the Courts Service HERE on page 74)

District Court: Unmarried applicants (Section 6(a) Guardianship of Infants Act, 1964) 2010
Granted 2,072
Refused 68
Withdrawn/Struck out 643
Total 2,783

OR
The state can grant guardianship to any unmarried father who bothers to apply by making a statutory declaration but without the necessity of requiring the mothers permission. If the mother objects, she can quite simply go to Court (as the father does now) and make her views known to the Judge (who will probably agree with her in 2.5% of cases). Forget about the rights or wrongs of the matter but think about the money the State would save if it only had to listen to 25 cases per 1000 as opposed to 975 cases per 1000, taking into consideration that most (no specific figures) of these cases are defended by the Legal Aid Board!!!

Zombrex wrote: »

Refusing to hear them at all because of a vendata against mothers who have objected in the past is just stupid.

My above point proves that my views are not a "vendetta" against mothers but simply a practical economically viable solution to an unnecessarily expensive problem. I believe your use of the word "Vendetta" is inflammatory. Although 97.5% of mothers who objected to the men they chose to father their children failed in court to prevent those men from taking a responsible position for their children, I have not spent much time even thinking about them. As a married man, I am much more concerned about the State's failure to protect childrens rights to have their married parents act JOINTLY as Guardians.

Zombrex wrote: »

James Jones wrote: »

When you take a driving test, it is between the state and the learner driver. No other citizen can appear at the test and be allowed to prevent a learner driver from being granted a driving licence.

Then again, a driving licence is generally respected by state authorities whereas a fathers Guardianship is not.

True, but there are plenty of examples where the State does take the views of other citizens into account, such as applying for planning permission.

Then you should have used such an analogy when making your flimsy argument in the first place:rolleyes:

Zombrex wrote: »

The State cares about the views of others when they are deciding on something that will effect more than just you.

No they don't!!! They don't care about the views of married fathers (who act as Legal Guardians JOINTLY with the mother of their children) even when those fathers are happily married and living with the mother and the children!!! Get a grip!!!

Zombrex wrote: »

Currently the law does not reflect that position, so your issue seems to be more with State agencies not following the law rather than the law itself. These are two separate issues, calling for a change of law seems redundant if the main objection is that agencies don't follow the law as it is.

I think you should be made aware that this was not my thread therefore its not my "issue"!!!

Zombrex wrote: »

Guardianship has nothing whatsoever to do with access, your figure means zip.

True custody and guardianship are separate processes,

You seem to have a difficulty with the terminology as you have mixed up Guardianship, Access and Custody so let me explain: Guardianship is the legal relationship between a child and its parent(s). Custody determines the living arrangements of a child and Access governs when a child spends time with their non-custodial parent. Although related, they are all separate entities.

Zombrex wrote: »

rolly1 wrote: »

Guardianship has nothing whatsoever to do with access, your figure means zip.

True custody and guardianship are separate processes, but there is significant over lap. It seems some what unlikely that one would be largely free of significant bias and the other riddled with it. Are the handled by two completely separate State organizations?

Both are handled by the Courts. Guardianship is granted willy-nilly to basically anyone who applies for it. Access, on the other hand, is restricted because it actually matters.


EDIT: Thats the longest post I EVER wrote!!!

James Jones

Sorry Zombrex but when I was slagging you off about mixing up Guardianship, Custody and Access, I didn't know that you suffered from Dyslexia. I don't know if that explains your lack of understanding of these three words because I don't know much about dyslexia but I think it important that when discussing such matters, the ordinary unmarried man-in-the-street is not led to believe something that is not true.

Zombrex

James Jones wrote: »

Sorry Zombrex but when I was slagging you off about mixing up Guardianship, Custody and Access, I didn't know that you suffered from Dyslexia. I don't know if that explains your lack of understanding of these three words because I don't know much about dyslexia but I think it important that when discussing such matters, the ordinary unmarried man-in-the-street is not led to believe something that is not true.

Er, ok. :rolleyes:

As I explained to rolly I'm not saying access is the same as guardianship, I'm asking him where did he get his figures from because as it stands the vast majority of fathers get guardianship access with little trouble so it is a little hard to believe that the State is at the same time denying them all custody due to a systematic and inherent bias that is apparently not present in the system that deals with guardianship, which as I've said has a huge over lap with the system that deals with custody.

It seems more plausible, at least until the position is supported, to consider that perhaps rolly is just talking to the vocal minority, who tend to believe their bad experiences with a system will reflect the experience of the majority. Which is not necessarily the case, hence why statistics exist in the first place.

Bullseye1

How important is having the fathers name on the birth certificate when it comes to these legal discussion? Isn't it the case that the mother can omit the fathers name altogether.

Zombrex

rolly1 wrote: »

Listen here Wicknight your bs from the last thread about being a family court judge of 15 years is still pretty sharp in my mind. I have little time for playing around with lying bigots.

Goodnight to you; you strange, strange person.

Ok, so I'm assume then you don't have anything to back up this impression.

Has it occurred to you that while some fathers may have legitimate grievances with the State and they system, simple human psychology will lead to people believing that their experiences reflect the system as a whole. This is why people go to the bother of collecting statistics in the first place, because while people are often very qualified to talk about their own individual experiences this often ends up being unreliable when applied to the wider collection.

For example if you went to Feedback forum on Boards you might get the impression that Boards.ie is full of people who are annoyed and disgruntled with Boards.

But this impression gives no context though to the over all experience of Boards.ie without knowing the percentage these complaints make up. Are 2% of Boards users regularly complaining on Feedback or is it 70%.

While neither scenario invalidates the individual user's experience, it does give vastly different idea to what the over all experience of Boards.ie is like.

Zombrex

Bullseye1 wrote: »

How important is having the fathers name on the birth certificate when it comes to these legal discussion? Isn't it the case that the mother can omit the fathers name altogether.

The name on the birth cert comes into play when demonstrating paternity. This can be an initial step in applying for guardianship, but having your name on the birth cert is not an automatic demonstration of guardianship.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/separation_and_divorce/presumption_of_paternity.html

Fromthetrees

I have set up a social group for unmarried and separated fathers if any one is interested in joining plese do. Social Group