angels330

hi all, just wondering if anyone would be able to give me some advice as im stressing a little. im due to be induced next week and i decided a couple of weeks ago that for the sake of our lo, my ex should be on the birth certificate. ive just seen that they are introducing a new law in autumn that requires fathers to be named and i think them to sign. just wondering if anyone knew when this comes into law, and if i qualify in getting him to sign it since lo will be here next week. he doesnt wish to acknowldge the existence of his child but im hoping this law requires him to have his name on even though he doesnt want to be. should i contact him and tell him the situation? as much as i hate him i wouldnt wish the courts to hassle him if it can be avoided. xx

LongRoadAhead

Heya angels330
Im wondering the same thing to as me and the bf are on and off and one minute he wants to know and the next he doesnt.
I looked it up on the net the other day and I think it says the law changed in june this year, that the father does need to be named apart from in exeptional circumstances such as abuse and violence, and he doesnt need to be there for this, I think its so that fathers play more of a role in their childs life whether they want to or not, dont quote me on this thou as im not 100% sure, but i would be greatfull too if anyone knows what the actual law is.
X x

angels330

yeah i read something about june this year, i just wasnt sure if that was when is was proposed or when it came to pass! im going to contact ca tomorrow and ask them directly. will let you know what they say!xx

Sarah88

But what happens if the mother doesn't know who the father is?

sam's mum

That's what I was thinking...how can they make it law when it can't actually be proven without DNA tests? Anyone can lie and say they don't know who the father is if they don't want them on the birth certificate?

Sorry for not answering your question at all - I didn't even know there was a new law, but can you just tell him that his name needs to be on it (for maintenance etc) and he either comes with you to sign or it's going to be so much more hassle for him? x

angels330

thats the stupid part of the law - there is nothing to stop mothers from saying i dont know and theres nothing anyone can do about it!

Younglutonmum

I don't think anything came into palce this June

I registered Mayas birth a couple of weeks ago & I didn't have to name the father. There was no exceptional circumstances either - I just didn't want him on there!!

I think in June they proposed amendments to birth certificates & parental responsibility but so far nothing has come of it. The last time anything changed was December 2003 I think

Younglutonmum

Just found this -

http://womensgrid.freecharity.org.uk/?p=132

I'm actually disgusted!! They really are gonna make single mums name the father or face a possible £200 fine!! This was suggested in June this year & needs to be debated in Parliament yet.

I'm actually fuming. If I had been forced to name Mayas dad on her birth certificate then he would have automatically gained parental rights. Why would I want that piece of s**t to have that?? I'd rather pay the fine to be quite honest

nightkd

That's hideous!!! Why???? If mothers name the father on the birth certificate and the father doesn't want to know, it's just setting him up for child maintenence etc. What if the mother wants him out of baby's life and doesn't need his money etc? She has to pay £200, of her baby's money basically, to the state???????

Stupid government!!! I hate this stupid government so much...I do...hate....GRRRR!!

The baby could suffer either way; mother will lose £200 of money, so will be that money short for getting stuff for baby, or father that doesn't want to know could be forced into baby's life and potentially upset child or more. I just...I don't believe the government.

Can someone explain WHY they might do this?

angels330

the government are totally disregarding feelings of the mother, if they dont want the father named, theres a good reason as to why, but now they have to pay for it if they want to stand by theyre choice! and it looks like theyre jst thinking of the money side as usual.. typical government