Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Father listed as parent, not father

  • 28-08-2012 2:46pm
    #1
    MariMel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 323 ✭✭


    A fathers name can be added to a childs birth cert if there is a court order for maintenance naming him as the father of that child.

    If however he is listed as the parent on a court order and not specifically as the father, could this make a difference?

    I find it a bit hard to get my head around if both the mother and fathers names are listed on a court order surely if one parent (mother) is already on the birth cert, then the other parent is the father?

    I know I was always told never to assume anything...but this I thought would be self explanatory.


Comments

  • #2
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,552 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    Whut?


  • #3
    MariMel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 323 ✭✭MariMel


    Say for example there is a court order for maintenance listing the names of both parents to a child. But the order saying 'X (father) as parent of Y child is to pay etc etc'

    When the mother goes to add the fathers name to the childs birth cert, being that she is able to once she has a court order regarding maintenance, then surely she should be able to do so. However the fact the father is named as a parent of her child and not as the father, then she is not permitted to add his name without his consent. Whereas before she could.

    I'm asking what difference there is between being named as the father or a child, and being named as a parent of the child when it is blatantly obvious who the mother is?


  • #4
    MagicSean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,897 ✭✭✭MagicSean


    MariMel wrote: »
    Say for example there is a court order for maintenance listing the names of both parents to a child. But the order saying 'X (father) as parent of Y child is to pay etc etc'

    When the mother goes to add the fathers name to the childs birth cert, being that she is able to once she has a court order regarding maintenance, then surely she should be able to do so. However the fact the father is named as a parent of her child and not as the father, then she is not permitted to add his name without his consent. Whereas before she could.

    I'm asking what difference there is between being named as the father or a child, and being named as a parent of the child when it is blatantly obvious who the mother is?

    The fathers name should have been on the birth cert if it was known. I presume the fact that a name being added afterwards is seen as suspicious and requires some kind of proof or consent.


  • #5
    MariMel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 323 ✭✭MariMel


    MagicSean wrote: »
    The fathers name should have been on the birth cert if it was known. I presume the fact that a name being added afterwards is seen as suspicious and requires some kind of proof or consent.


    Having a court order is accepted as proof that the father is the father and as such it can be added to a birth cert.

    However in this case is the fact the father is listed as a parent of the child and not specifically as its father that is causing the issue.

    That is the issue in question here, not why the fathers name is being added now and not at time of registration.


  • #6
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,552 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    MariMel wrote: »
    MagicSean wrote: »
    The fathers name should have been on the birth cert if it was known. I presume the fact that a name being added afterwards is seen as suspicious and requires some kind of proof or consent.


    Having a court order is accepted as proof that the father is the father and as such it can be added to a birth cert.

    However in this case is the fact the father is listed as a parent of the child and not specifically as its father that is causing the issue.

    That is the issue in question here, not why the fathers name is being added now and not at time of registration.

    If this is a real life scenario I suggest you speak to a solicitor to deal with a bureaucratic mess. I suspect I know what the problem might be but legal advice is not permitted on this board.

    If youcant afford a solicitor or don't want to engage one, you could try contacting the registrar or births deaths and marriages or try to figure it out on your own.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    MariMel
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 323 ✭✭MariMel


    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    If this is a real life scenario I suggest you speak to a solicitor to deal with a bureaucratic mess. I suspect I know what the problem might be but legal advice is not permitted on this board.

    If youcant afford a solicitor or don't want to engage one, you could try contacting the registrar or births deaths and marriages or try to figure it out on your own.


    Duly noted....I had wondered if there was any particular argument that could be made with regards to the assumption that a parent is either the mother or father of a child. And in this case, since it mother is known and before the registrar, that in effect, the other parent would be the father?

    I dont normally like to assume things. But wasnt sure that there was any law etc that could be applied whereby two women or two men were lsited as parents but no member of the opposite sex was. Thus making is impossible to assume that the other parent was a different sex.

    The person concerned has already met with the registrar and they too were unsure if they could use the court order being that the father is listed as being a parent of the child and not specifically as the father of that child.


  • #8
    johnnyskeleton
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 14,552 Mod ✭✭✭✭johnnyskeleton


    MariMel wrote: »
    johnnyskeleton wrote: »
    If this is a real life scenario I suggest you speak to a solicitor to deal with a bureaucratic mess. I suspect I know what the problem might be but legal advice is not permitted on this board.

    If youcant afford a solicitor or don't want to engage one, you could try contacting the registrar or births deaths and marriages or try to figure it out on your own.


    Duly noted....I had wondered if there was any particular argument that could be made with regards to the assumption that a parent is either the mother or father of a child. And in this case, since it mother is known and before the registrar, that in effect, the other parent would be the father?

    I dont normally like to assume things. But wasnt sure that there was any law etc that could be applied whereby two women or two men were lsited as parents but no member of the opposite sex was. Thus making is impossible to assume that the other parent was a different sex.

    The person concerned has already met with the registrar and they too were unsure if they could use the court order being that the father is listed as being a parent of the child and not specifically as the father of that child.

    I think it's probably just a misunderstanding rather than any legal distinction between parent and father.


Advertisement