# Advice about BirthCertificate??



## karamel

Alright ; last night here was the debate in my household :

Should I put FOBs name on the BC or not?

I don't particularily want him to have any rights to the child (mean, i know, but he's not a good person) ; and I couldn't care less about child support. He currently has a 6 y/o that he pays $221 a month for. So it's not like it'd be a substantial amount.
Even if he were to have rights, I would be telling the courts I only want him to be allowed supervised visitation if anything. 
But ;

I have a feeling that FOB is going to fight for his rights to this child. But, I also know he can't afford DNA testing or anything if he's not listed as the father on the BC. But I'm sure he'll find a way to pay for it. 

So what do you all think would be easier? Just to put him on the BC, go for sole custody with no access ; or not put him on the BC and have him have to fight for rights (if he chooses to). Like i said, the child support isn't really something I'm worried about ; but if his name is on the BC, then I'll have to go for CS as my assistance with income when the baby is born will make me do so. As a single mother, they'll force it. FOB not on BC means I never have to deal with him again, unless like i said, he fights to see the baby.

I just really don't know what to do. And I also don't know if it'll come back to bite me in the ass if I DONT put him on the BC, knowing damn well he's the father.

I'm thinking I should consult a lawyer about the whole thing ; but I'm really just not sure what to do! 
And advice would be amazing :)


----------



## toonlagoon

if im honsit with you form my point of view i would sujest to you ou dont put his name on it 
as he would have to fight for it and if he cant aford a dna test he can not prove it is !!
you put his name on there and he can take you to sort for acses im not 110% shore that excly right 
but that how it worked for my cosen


----------



## karamel

I know that with his name on it ; he has rights. 
Even if i file for sole custody with no access, he can fight it in court. And then it becomes the judge's decision what FOB will get. And I'm scared that he'll get like weekends or anything like it. I don't trust FOB, and I def will not trust him with my baby when he/she is born. But if the courts decide to give him access, there would be nothing I could do.
So maybe NOT putting his name on BC is the best idea..


----------



## toonlagoon

read toght what i posted last its called can you relaite by toonlagoon 
that my ex  lol
and well if i was you i woudl not pout name on get any infopeople that have seen his bahavour down and any info you can get on y he shoudl not see it get it ready for if he dose protecst but if i was you do not put his name on it


----------



## Hollys_Twinny

I think if he's the daddy his name should be put on there regardless of the amount of money he can provide! If you fear for your childs safety, then you can still apply for supervised visits. If he's not violent, then I really don't see why you'd want your child to not have contact with him!


----------



## toonlagoon

no disrecpect to you as that what you think but read what i posted and in certan cercumstnses its best and at the end of the day if it right for you cos the cercumstanses are not good then it somtimes not as easy sorry about speelling i have dexlexier xx


----------



## karamel

x Hayley x said:


> I think if he's the daddy his name should be put on there regardless of the amount of money he can provide! If you fear for your childs safety, then you can still apply for supervised visits. If he's not violent, then I really don't see why you'd want your child to not have contact with him!

It really has nothing to do with money. All I'm saying is if his name is on it ; i will have to go for CS and it's not something I'm concerned about.
I do fear for my child's safety, during our break up he threated to get a knife and give me an abortion. He's been charged with assault on a minor, being his 6 y/o, which happened a few years ago.
I don't believe him to be a good father, I don't trust him, or his anger issues or his drug habits. And that's why I don't want my child to have contact with him!
I'm not just being a spiteful b*tch here and saying "eff him i dont want him to see his kid". I'm sincerely looking for the best situation for my child. 
I'm willing to do supervised visits, but my fear is that if he fights that in court, he'll get more than that. (he currently gets every other weekend with his other son). And I don't trust him with our child alone. 
There are other issues and experiences about the FOB that are playing a role here, but I don't feel the need to completely hang him out to dry. 

But thanks for your opinion on the situation.


----------



## toonlagoon

but as long as you can get the cort to agree with your point of view and can prove all he has done then they will NOt give him more than suprived if that 
a smy cosen had a abbay with som1 that had a pasr of drug abuse and tryed to kidnap the babay 
and that pritty much all it took for them to say supervised visits for 2 hours a week 
so you no they do tned to think of what best for the babay and my cosen wonted him to have some acses they cort wernt going to give him a thing


----------



## Joyzerelly

If the father isn't a violent or dangerous person, then I think you should put his name on the BC. His child has a right to know his father and may grow up to resent you if you prevent their having a relationship. He also has a right to a relationship with his child. But it's the child who is most important here, not whether or not you have to deal with the man again. He was nice enough for you to get pregnant by him after all.


----------



## Joyzerelly

karamel said:


> x Hayley x said:
> 
> 
> I think if he's the daddy his name should be put on there regardless of the amount of money he can provide! If you fear for your childs safety, then you can still apply for supervised visits. If he's not violent, then I really don't see why you'd want your child to not have contact with him!
> 
> It really has nothing to do with money. All I'm saying is if his name is on it ; i will have to go for CS and it's not something I'm concerned about.
> I do fear for my child's safety, during our break up he threated to get a knife and give me an abortion. He's been charged with assault on a minor, being his 6 y/o, which happened a few years ago.
> I don't believe him to be a good father, I don't trust him, or his anger issues or his drug habits. And that's why I don't want my child to have contact with him!
> I'm not just being a spiteful b*tch here and saying "eff him i dont want him to see his kid". I'm sincerely looking for the best situation for my child.
> I'm willing to do supervised visits, but my fear is that if he fights that in court, he'll get more than that. (he currently gets every other weekend with his other son). And I don't trust him with our child alone.
> There are other issues and experiences about the FOB that are playing a role here, but I don't feel the need to completely hang him out to dry.
> 
> But thanks for your opinion on the situation.Click to expand...

All of the above being fact, I wouldn't put his name on the birth certificate, and I'd move far far away from him so he doesn't know where you are.


----------



## toonlagoon

i agree lol


----------



## karamel

Joyzerelly said:


> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> x Hayley x said:
> 
> 
> I think if he's the daddy his name should be put on there regardless of the amount of money he can provide! If you fear for your childs safety, then you can still apply for supervised visits. If he's not violent, then I really don't see why you'd want your child to not have contact with him!
> 
> It really has nothing to do with money. All I'm saying is if his name is on it ; i will have to go for CS and it's not something I'm concerned about.
> I do fear for my child's safety, during our break up he threated to get a knife and give me an abortion. He's been charged with assault on a minor, being his 6 y/o, which happened a few years ago.
> I don't believe him to be a good father, I don't trust him, or his anger issues or his drug habits. And that's why I don't want my child to have contact with him!
> I'm not just being a spiteful b*tch here and saying "eff him i dont want him to see his kid". I'm sincerely looking for the best situation for my child.
> I'm willing to do supervised visits, but my fear is that if he fights that in court, he'll get more than that. (he currently gets every other weekend with his other son). And I don't trust him with our child alone.
> There are other issues and experiences about the FOB that are playing a role here, but I don't feel the need to completely hang him out to dry.
> 
> But thanks for your opinion on the situation.Click to expand...
> 
> All of the above being fact, I wouldn't put his name on the birth certificate, and I'd move far far away from him so he doesn't know where you are.Click to expand...

It is fact. The night we broke up ; he uttered the threat. I had him arrested. Right now, he has conditions which include he can't come within 200 meters of my residence nor can he attempt to contact me without it being breach of his conditions.
And it's for these reasons that I don't want him having contact with this child.
I understand that it's unfair to the child to not have a relationship with his or her father, but in this circumstance, I think it's a better way. 
Like i said, I'm not just being spiteful, I'm looking out for my child's best interest.


----------



## toonlagoon

youre doign the right thing for you huni 
and i will suport you if you need it


----------



## karamel

toonlagoon said:


> youre doign the right thing for you huni
> and i will suport you if you need it

Thanks :)
I know not everyone agrees with how I want to handle the situation ; but the baby is the important party here ; and I'm it's mother, therefore I make the decisions here.


----------



## toonlagoon

excly and i agree with you i supose thow cos of my situtaion and cos of the things thats happned with my cosen and things i can relaite to youre siution lot mire and understnd how you feel and im realy happy to try suport you as much as i can if you send me a privet messge with you e male adress ior number on we can keep in contact if you like


----------



## karamel

toonlagoon said:


> excly and i agree with you i supose thow cos of my situtaion and cos of the things thats happned with my cosen and things i can relaite to youre siution lot mire and understnd how you feel and im realy happy to try suport you as much as i can if you send me a privet messge with you e male adress ior number on we can keep in contact if you like

Sent :)


----------



## princessellie

i wouldnt put his name no if he acted like that towards me and had actually threatened my baby!!!

when you register your baby tell them you slept with two people and dont know who is the father, then i dont think they can make you put either name on, jic

x


----------



## nievesmama

I had major probs with my LOs dad. When i went to register her i explained the situation to the registrar they were fine with not putting him on. There is just a line through the space where FOB should go.


----------



## karamel

Thanks for everyone's advice. :)
I'm still mildly unsure of what I'm going to do. it's 6 of one, half a dozen of another.


----------



## purpledahlia

If he threatened your child, and you, then i dont even see why you would consider putting him on and handing over rights to him.

I didnt get asked why/who or anything about FOB when i registered ava. Simply said hes not going on and she said ok and did a line through the space. 

Im not sure about the law's in canada... but i wouldnt put him on.


----------



## purpledahlia

If he threatened your child, and you, then i dont even see why you would consider putting him on and handing over rights to him.

I didnt get asked why/who or anything about FOB when i registered ava. Simply said hes not going on and she said ok and did a line through the space. 

Im not sure about the law's in canada... but i wouldnt put him on.


----------



## karamel

purpledahlia said:


> If he threatened your child, and you, then i dont even see why you would consider putting him on and handing over rights to him.
> 
> I didnt get asked why/who or anything about FOB when i registered ava. Simply said hes not going on and she said ok and did a line through the space.
> 
> Im not sure about the law's in canada... but i wouldnt put him on.

My only concern is if I dont put him on the BC and then he fights for rights ; wouldn't that put me in a bad position for not putting him on in the first place, knowing he is the father?


----------



## purpledahlia

Not if hes violent and you have genuine concerns and reasons for not putting him on? Violence and threats will stand against him in court...


----------



## bek74

karamel said:


> Alright ; last night here was the debate in my household :
> 
> Should I put FOBs name on the BC or not?
> 
> I don't particularily want him to have any rights to the child (mean, i know, but he's not a good person) ; and I couldn't care less about child support. He currently has a 6 y/o that he pays $221 a month for. So it's not like it'd be a substantial amount.
> Even if he were to have rights, I would be telling the courts I only want him to be allowed supervised visitation if anything.
> But ;
> 
> I have a feeling that FOB is going to fight for his rights to this child. But, I also know he can't afford DNA testing or anything if he's not listed as the father on the BC. But I'm sure he'll find a way to pay for it.
> 
> So what do you all think would be easier? Just to put him on the BC, go for sole custody with no access ; or not put him on the BC and have him have to fight for rights (if he chooses to). Like i said, the child support isn't really something I'm worried about ; but if his name is on the BC, then I'll have to go for CS as my assistance with income when the baby is born will make me do so. As a single mother, they'll force it. FOB not on BC means I never have to deal with him again, unless like i said, he fights to see the baby.
> 
> I just really don't know what to do. And I also don't know if it'll come back to bite me in the ass if I DONT put him on the BC, knowing damn well he's the father.
> 
> I'm thinking I should consult a lawyer about the whole thing ; but I'm really just not sure what to do!
> And advice would be amazing :)

 
I live in Aussie so things work differently over here. Here if you fail to put the correct information on the BC you can get in alot of trouble as it is a LEGAL document, not only that. If the father claims to be the father and takes the matter further, yes he will have to pay the DNA testing and if it comes out positive he is the father then he can sue you to recover his court and DNA expenses so in actual fact it won't cost him anything in the log run. Not to mention the fact that your were dishonest won't help your custody case.

I know alot of posters have suggested NOT to put him on, but threats and violence acts have nothing to do with putting false, incorrect information on a LEGAL document. If you have concerns regarding violence etc then you will need to take the CORRECT LEGAL approach.

You could not put him on as others have done and I guess their ex's haven't taken the matter further, but in your case you feel your ex may take it further, in the long run it could cost you alot, money and possibly custody.

I would go the honest legal way and apply for sole custody. Just don't do anything you may regret, yes you may have a long road ahead of you, but by the sounds if it, that will be the case either way, so in my opinion I would go the LEGAL way.


----------



## purpledahlia

Its not illegal to not name the father here. Infact you cant put him on here, He has to be there and sign himself. Some people dont know the fathers of their kids..


----------



## karamel

I think what I'll do is contact a lawyer and get their advice as well.
Not that I don't appreciate everyone who's given me advice ; but I'd rather be safe that sorry.
If i have to ; I'll go for sole custody the moment the baby is born. 
I just don't want to end up screwed because of anything.


----------



## purpledahlia

I dont understand, your not loosing anything by not putting him on, hes a violent dangerous man! you dont need to go for sole custody - he has no rights if hes not on it. even if he fights to get put on it, he will never get custody if hes threatened your lifes. so it doesnt really matter? if you put him on your giving him access and rights... why would you do that for a man who threatened to cut open your stomach and take out your child? I would definatley just ignore him, move, and dont put him on the BC. if he fights he will have to pay and will probably loose. I dont really understand why you think he would get sole custody?


----------



## karamel

It's not my concern that he'd get sole custody.
My concern is not putting him on the BC and him fighting it because he knows damn well he's the father. There would be more drama and b.s. by not putting him on, than by putting him on and going for solecustody with no access the moment the bean is born. 
I know damn well he'd never get custody ; and as long as i took it to court, he'd never get access or anything of the sort. 
It's basically to avoid the unwanted drama from him. Which i know there will be lots ; if he's not named the father. He can't do anything about me going for solecustody and such ; and even if he argued any fact in court ; he'd lose. But what he could fight would be being named father if i didn't put him down on the BC, which as i said, would just be unwanted drama and b.s. 
Ugh ; why did i have to get involved with such a twisted individual.


----------



## purpledahlia

In the UK if you put him on, (well if he goes and is with you and is put on) then your handing over 50% parental responsibility, 50% rights. Just by allowing his name on it. I wouldnt do it. By allowing him to come and sign it and be on it is giving him a ledge to stand on imo. which he doesnt deserve,


----------



## purpledahlia

I'd say let him fight, he will have to pay for a dna and all the costs.. its not going to come out your pocket, and you have a completely valid reason so its not going to go against you,


----------



## teal

purpledahlia said:


> I'd say let him fight, he will have to pay for a dna and all the costs.. its not going to come out your pocket, and you have a completely valid reason so its not going to go against you,

I agree. 

It's not something that's going to go against you because you have good reason for not wanting to have him on the birth certificate. 

Does he not have to be present to be named on the birth certificate?


----------



## karamel

teal said:


> purpledahlia said:
> 
> 
> I'd say let him fight, he will have to pay for a dna and all the costs.. its not going to come out your pocket, and you have a completely valid reason so its not going to go against you,
> 
> I agree.
> 
> It's not something that's going to go against you because you have good reason for not wanting to have him on the birth certificate.
> 
> Does he not have to be present to be named on the birth certificate?Click to expand...

I have no idea if he has to be there or not. And if he does ;; well then that saves me lots of hassle, because he won't be there.


----------



## purpledahlia

check out your local registry office's rules online, im sure it will say if he has to be there, not sure about canadian law.


----------



## FBbaby

a birth certificate is not a document aiming at giving parents rights, it is a document for the child to know who his/her birth parents are. Personally, I find it unfair to decide to leave his name out, no matter what has happened until now. Yes, it sounds like he has some serious issues, but that doesn't change the fact that he is the biological father and your child has a right to have a document that makes it official. 

Deciding whether he should have rights or not is a totally different matter. In the end, you don't have to hand over your baby if you are worried, whether he is on the birth certificate or not, and you can leave it to him to take you to court. The judge can then decide what is best for the child. In the end, if he is determine to have contact and takes you to court, the judge will automatically order the name to be added anyway. If he isn't bothered and disappear anyway, then you won't have to worry about it, but at least your child will have an official document knowing that she has a known dad.


----------



## purpledahlia

FBbaby said:


> a birth certificate is not a document aiming at giving parents rights, it is a document for the child to know who his/her birth parents are. Personally, I find it unfair to decide to leave his name out, no matter what has happened until now. Yes, it sounds like he has some serious issues, but that doesn't change the fact that he is the biological father and your child has a right to have a document that makes it official.
> 
> Deciding whether he should have rights or not is a totally different matter. In the end, you don't have to hand over your baby if you are worried, whether he is on the birth certificate or not, and you can leave it to him to take you to court. The judge can then decide what is best for the child. In the end, if he is determine to have contact and takes you to court, the judge will automatically order the name to be added anyway. If he isn't bothered and disappear anyway, then you won't have to worry about it, but at least your child will have an official document knowing that she has a known dad.

Actually, if you google it and do some more reaserch you will see by putting the father on the BC DOES automatically give him 50% parental responsibility and rights to the childs life for the next 18 years. 

He could stop you moving somewhere.. going on a long holiday abroad.. lots of things. The two are linked very closely. 

The abbreviated BC doesnt have either parent on it anyway. only the full one has parents details and i for one am very glad the FOB is not on it. no way is he having control over simple things like where i choose to live, what school my child goes too, religion, etc.


----------



## purpledahlia

A DNA test can make it official without handing over rights


----------



## purpledahlia

some quotes on the topic found online 




If your child has no name on the birth certificate it limits the father's automatic rights, so depending upon the current state of your relationship with him you may or may not wish to include his name. If it's a purely financial question, it's less likely he'll have to pay automatically if he's absent on the certificate, but if he's a cause for concern in other ways then you'll probably want to leave him off as it makes it much harder for him to cause difficulty to you later on. You can tell your child who their father is should you choose to, you really don't need to have it written on the birth certificate and if you are unmarried he'll have to be present and agree before his name can be included anyway.Think about all the pros and cons carefully before you decide as the wrong choice could make things very difficult for you either financially or in terms of personal freedom. 

I think it's actually common sense. As nice as the ideal idea of having the father's name on the birth certifictae is theoretically, it could potentially lead to all sorts of trouble. If she has her baby and plans to look after it then clearly she is entitled to parental responsibility, but all too often there are indifferent or psychopathically jealous ex partners that would merely seek to destroy someone's personal happiness with that responsibility. If he's a nice guy fair enough but not everyone is ( male or female) and common sense dictates that if he's a pain in the backside prat then he shouldn't have it ( and I'm a man btw , so this isn't a feminist rant). 

Putting a man's name on a birth certificate gives him legal rights which if his name is not present he does not have.The term "parental responsibility" simply means that he has an equal say in the childs upbringing with the childs mother. 

https://www.separateddads.co.uk/SeparationRightsForFathers.html

Naming the father on a birth certificate

If the parents are married both have to have their names registered.

If the parents are not married the following points are important:-

* the mother does not have to give details of the father on the birth certificate. She can leave that part of the form blank
* the father cannot register his name unless the mother agrees
* when both the mother and father agree to the father&#8217;s name being registered they can go to the office together. However, if only one of the parents goes to the registrar&#8217;s office s/he has to have a document called a declaration, signed by the other parent, to prove that each agrees to the father&#8217;s name being added. There are special forms available at the Registrar&#8217;s office to make the declaration
* the mother can register the father as being the father if she has a court order declaring that he is the father.

From 4 May 2006, an unmarried father who jointly registers the birth of his child with the child&#8217;s mother will automatically acquire full parental responsibilities and rights towards the child and he will share these with the child&#8217;s mother. An unmarried father who jointly registered the birth of his child before that date will not suddenly acquire these rights. He would have to enter into a parental responsibilities agreement with the child&#8217;s mother or go to court to acquire these rights and responsibilities.

Registering a father on a child's birth certificate may also have the following effects:-

* the Child Support Agency or the courts could use the certificate as evidence of paternity for maintenance proceedings
* the courts could use the certificate as evidence of adultery
* the father could use the certificate as evidence if he wants to apply to the courts for parental rights and responsibilities
* the certificate gives very strong evidence that he is the father because his name can only be added if both the mother and father agree that he is the father or a court order states that he is
* the child will have information about who both parents are.


----------



## purpledahlia

double post


----------



## rewizz

well here in england the father has to go with you to have his name on bc ... so up to you .. i'm having that dilema too .. we only have 3 weeks to register .. and my plan is if he doesn't mention it .. then neither will i and his name will not be on ... 
can't say fairer than that i'm not here to remind him of jack anymore and if he doesn't do his own reasearch why should i point these facts out to him !!! mmmmmmm
lalalalalalalalalalala 
de 
da !!!!!!!!


----------



## purpledahlia

yeah same in scotland rewizz.. he has to be there and only got 21 days to register her.. 
I had the same plan.. if he doesnt mention it neither will i! :D he didnt! (but then he would need to actually TALK to me to mention it, and he didnt.


----------



## karamel

So that really answers my question for me ;; if he has to be there to have his name on it, it wont have his name on it. And that's not even MY decision ;; because of his conditions for threatening me & baby, he can't come near me til court, and I HIGHLY doubt that his court will be before baby's born. When he was arrested the cop said a year or more ;; and it's only been a month. 
Thanks everyone for your advice :)


----------



## FBbaby

purpledahlia said:


> FBbaby said:
> 
> 
> a birth certificate is not a document aiming at giving parents rights, it is a document for the child to know who his/her birth parents are. Personally, I find it unfair to decide to leave his name out, no matter what has happened until now. Yes, it sounds like he has some serious issues, but that doesn't change the fact that he is the biological father and your child has a right to have a document that makes it official.
> 
> Deciding whether he should have rights or not is a totally different matter. In the end, you don't have to hand over your baby if you are worried, whether he is on the birth certificate or not, and you can leave it to him to take you to court. The judge can then decide what is best for the child. In the end, if he is determine to have contact and takes you to court, the judge will automatically order the name to be added anyway. If he isn't bothered and disappear anyway, then you won't have to worry about it, but at least your child will have an official document knowing that she has a known dad.
> 
> Actually, if you google it and do some more reaserch you will see by putting the father on the BC DOES automatically give him 50% parental responsibility and rights to the childs life for the next 18 years.
> 
> He could stop you moving somewhere.. going on a long holiday abroad.. lots of things. The two are linked very closely.
> 
> The abbreviated BC doesnt have either parent on it anyway. only the full one has parents details and i for one am very glad the FOB is not on it. no way is he having control over simple things like where i choose to live, what school my child goes too, religion, etc.Click to expand...

It is true that a father doesn't have automatic parental responsibility if he isn't on the BC (as fathers of children born before dec 03 if he wasn't married to the mother, as in my case), but what I am trying to convey is that it would take ittle for him to gain it if he wanted to. All it takes is for him to complete a 2 page form, pay £200, and take it to the judge and he will get it if he can prove with a dna test that he is indeed the father. The judge would have to have a good reason to deny it, ie. evidence that the father would be a danger to the child (and very often, evidence that the father was violent to the mother isn't enough as it doesn't forceably mean he would be violent towards the child too).

I am not stating what I think is right or wrong, on a personal basis, I don't think it is right that a father can disappear or badly treat the mother and then decide to use his rights to his benefit, but a judge will always consider the welfare of the child and the position at the moment is that it is always better to have a father in your life, even if he is not perfect than not at all, hence judges much more likely to grant parental responsibility and visitation rights than not. 

In your case, if he can't be with you on the day, then he will have to go to court indeed, but if he is motivated, it will be very easy for him to have his name added.


----------



## karamel

FBbaby said:


> purpledahlia said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FBbaby said:
> 
> 
> a birth certificate is not a document aiming at giving parents rights, it is a document for the child to know who his/her birth parents are. Personally, I find it unfair to decide to leave his name out, no matter what has happened until now. Yes, it sounds like he has some serious issues, but that doesn't change the fact that he is the biological father and your child has a right to have a document that makes it official.
> 
> Deciding whether he should have rights or not is a totally different matter. In the end, you don't have to hand over your baby if you are worried, whether he is on the birth certificate or not, and you can leave it to him to take you to court. The judge can then decide what is best for the child. In the end, if he is determine to have contact and takes you to court, the judge will automatically order the name to be added anyway. If he isn't bothered and disappear anyway, then you won't have to worry about it, but at least your child will have an official document knowing that she has a known dad.
> 
> Actually, if you google it and do some more reaserch you will see by putting the father on the BC DOES automatically give him 50% parental responsibility and rights to the childs life for the next 18 years.
> 
> He could stop you moving somewhere.. going on a long holiday abroad.. lots of things. The two are linked very closely.
> 
> The abbreviated BC doesnt have either parent on it anyway. only the full one has parents details and i for one am very glad the FOB is not on it. no way is he having control over simple things like where i choose to live, what school my child goes too, religion, etc.Click to expand...
> 
> It is true that a father doesn't have automatic parental responsibility if he isn't on the BC (as fathers of children born before dec 03 if he wasn't married to the mother, as in my case), but what I am trying to convey is that it would take ittle for him to gain it if he wanted to. All it takes is for him to complete a 2 page form, pay £200, and take it to the judge and he will get it if he can prove with a dna test that he is indeed the father. The judge would have to have a good reason to deny it, ie. evidence that the father would be a danger to the child (and very often, evidence that the father was violent to the mother isn't enough as it doesn't forceably mean he would be violent towards the child too).
> 
> I am not stating what I think is right or wrong, on a personal basis, I don't think it is right that a father can disappear or badly treat the mother and then decide to use his rights to his benefit, but a judge will always consider the welfare of the child and the position at the moment is that it is always better to have a father in your life, even if he is not perfect than not at all, hence judges much more likely to grant parental responsibility and visitation rights than not.
> 
> In your case, if he can't be with you on the day, then he will have to go to court indeed, but if he is motivated, it will be very easy for him to have his name added.Click to expand...

I know (well im pretty sure) that he'll do whatever it takes to be named. I'm sure he'll do whatever it takes to see the child.
As he won't be there, he won't be named. But, it won't be long before he takes the steps to be named on the BC. 
It's no longer really a debate on putting his name on it, as i can't without him there. It's more, that I will have to plan my attack on going to court for custody and such ; as the moment FOB begins showing signs that he wants to be involved, I will take action. The sooner the better as far as I'm concerned. The longer it goes, the more b.s. that will be involved.

Thanks for your input, i appreciate it :)


----------



## aliss

karamel said:


> because of his conditions for threatening me & baby, he can't come near me til court, and I HIGHLY doubt that his court will be before baby's born. When he was arrested the cop said a year or more ;; and it's only been a month.

Hi karamel,

In Canada, the conditions (no contact and other conditions such as no possession of weapons) will stay until the first appearance in court. After the first appearance, the judge will either keep those conditions,modify,or remove them. Usually, they are kept on in cases of domestic violence. The court date for the actual trial is usually 1-2 years away.


----------



## karamel

aliss said:


> karamel said:
> 
> 
> because of his conditions for threatening me & baby, he can't come near me til court, and I HIGHLY doubt that his court will be before baby's born. When he was arrested the cop said a year or more ;; and it's only been a month.
> 
> Hi karamel,
> 
> In Canada, the conditions (no contact and other conditions such as no possession of weapons) will stay until the first appearance in court. After the first appearance, the judge will either keep those conditions,modify,or remove them. Usually, they are kept on in cases of domestic violence. The court date for the actual trial is usually 1-2 years away.Click to expand...

When is the first appearance usually?
I know you're saying for the actual trial is 1 to 2 years, but does that include first appearance stuff?
The police officer who had him arrested, told me that there would be no contact until he went to court, and stated that it would be a year or more before that would occur. So now I'm confused.


----------



## aliss

karamel said:


> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> because of his conditions for threatening me & baby, he can't come near me til court, and I HIGHLY doubt that his court will be before baby's born. When he was arrested the cop said a year or more ;; and it's only been a month.
> 
> Hi karamel,
> 
> In Canada, the conditions (no contact and other conditions such as no possession of weapons) will stay until the first appearance in court. After the first appearance, the judge will either keep those conditions,modify,or remove them. Usually, they are kept on in cases of domestic violence. The court date for the actual trial is usually 1-2 years away.Click to expand...
> 
> When is the first appearance usually?
> I know you're saying for the actual trial is 1 to 2 years, but does that include first appearance stuff?
> The police officer who had him arrested, told me that there would be no contact until he went to court, and stated that it would be a year or more before that would occur. So now I'm confused.Click to expand...

It can really vary. If you call your local crown counsel office (if you can't find it in the phonebook, you can call the local police non emerg # and they will have it). After the police submit the "crown" (the police report/evidence), it is up to the courts and crown counsel (prosecutor) to arrange appearances. If you give them a ring tomorrow in the morning, they should be able to tell you. The police usually don't know,they just get notices a couple weeks in advance for the main trail and don't go to first appearances.


----------



## karamel

aliss said:


> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> because of his conditions for threatening me & baby, he can't come near me til court, and I HIGHLY doubt that his court will be before baby's born. When he was arrested the cop said a year or more ;; and it's only been a month.
> 
> Hi karamel,
> 
> In Canada, the conditions (no contact and other conditions such as no possession of weapons) will stay until the first appearance in court. After the first appearance, the judge will either keep those conditions,modify,or remove them. Usually, they are kept on in cases of domestic violence. The court date for the actual trial is usually 1-2 years away.Click to expand...
> 
> When is the first appearance usually?
> I know you're saying for the actual trial is 1 to 2 years, but does that include first appearance stuff?
> The police officer who had him arrested, told me that there would be no contact until he went to court, and stated that it would be a year or more before that would occur. So now I'm confused.Click to expand...
> 
> It can really vary. If you call your local crown counsel office (if you can't find it in the phonebook, you can call the local police non emerg # and they will have it). After the police submit the "crown" (the police report/evidence), it is up to the courts and crown counsel (prosecutor) to arrange appearances. If you give them a ring tomorrow in the morning, they should be able to tell you. The police usually don't know,they just get notices a couple weeks in advance for the main trail and don't go to first appearances.Click to expand...

Thanks :)
I'll call them first thing next week ; I have too much to do tomorrow already! lol

Question ; If the conditions are lifted, would i be notified??


----------



## aliss

karamel said:


> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> because of his conditions for threatening me & baby, he can't come near me til court, and I HIGHLY doubt that his court will be before baby's born. When he was arrested the cop said a year or more ;; and it's only been a month.
> 
> Hi karamel,
> 
> In Canada, the conditions (no contact and other conditions such as no possession of weapons) will stay until the first appearance in court. After the first appearance, the judge will either keep those conditions,modify,or remove them. Usually, they are kept on in cases of domestic violence. The court date for the actual trial is usually 1-2 years away.Click to expand...
> 
> When is the first appearance usually?
> I know you're saying for the actual trial is 1 to 2 years, but does that include first appearance stuff?
> The police officer who had him arrested, told me that there would be no contact until he went to court, and stated that it would be a year or more before that would occur. So now I'm confused.Click to expand...
> 
> It can really vary. If you call your local crown counsel office (if you can't find it in the phonebook, you can call the local police non emerg # and they will have it). After the police submit the "crown" (the police report/evidence), it is up to the courts and crown counsel (prosecutor) to arrange appearances. If you give them a ring tomorrow in the morning, they should be able to tell you. The police usually don't know,they just get notices a couple weeks in advance for the main trail and don't go to first appearances.Click to expand...
> 
> Thanks :)
> I'll call them first thing next week ; I have too much to do tomorrow already! lol
> 
> Question ; If the conditions are lifted, would i be notified??Click to expand...

You SHOULD be notified (it is called a k-file notification. k-files are domestics) but you should call just in case. Since your case is a threats file and not an actual domestic assault charge (or is it? I'm not sure), I'm not 100% sure if you would get the notification. The crown should call you and notify you (or the police sometimes come and visit if the crown has trouble getting hold of you).


----------



## karamel

aliss said:


> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> because of his conditions for threatening me & baby, he can't come near me til court, and I HIGHLY doubt that his court will be before baby's born. When he was arrested the cop said a year or more ;; and it's only been a month.
> 
> Hi karamel,
> 
> In Canada, the conditions (no contact and other conditions such as no possession of weapons) will stay until the first appearance in court. After the first appearance, the judge will either keep those conditions,modify,or remove them. Usually, they are kept on in cases of domestic violence. The court date for the actual trial is usually 1-2 years away.Click to expand...
> 
> When is the first appearance usually?
> I know you're saying for the actual trial is 1 to 2 years, but does that include first appearance stuff?
> The police officer who had him arrested, told me that there would be no contact until he went to court, and stated that it would be a year or more before that would occur. So now I'm confused.Click to expand...
> 
> It can really vary. If you call your local crown counsel office (if you can't find it in the phonebook, you can call the local police non emerg # and they will have it). After the police submit the "crown" (the police report/evidence), it is up to the courts and crown counsel (prosecutor) to arrange appearances. If you give them a ring tomorrow in the morning, they should be able to tell you. The police usually don't know,they just get notices a couple weeks in advance for the main trail and don't go to first appearances.Click to expand...
> 
> Thanks :)
> I'll call them first thing next week ; I have too much to do tomorrow already! lol
> 
> Question ; If the conditions are lifted, would i be notified??Click to expand...
> 
> You SHOULD be notified (it is called a k-file notification. k-files are domestics) but you should call just in case. Since your case is a threats file and not an actual domestic assault charge (or is it? I'm not sure), I'm not 100% sure if you would get the notification. The crown should call you and notify you (or the police sometimes come and visit if the crown has trouble getting hold of you).Click to expand...

Yeah it's just a threat. Not assault.
So what i'll do is call on monday and find out when the first appearance will be. At least that way I'll know when he's supposed to go, and after that date, I can call the police station and ask if the condition are still applicable i suppose?
How do you know all of this information??


----------



## aliss

karamel said:


> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> because of his conditions for threatening me & baby, he can't come near me til court, and I HIGHLY doubt that his court will be before baby's born. When he was arrested the cop said a year or more ;; and it's only been a month.
> 
> Hi karamel,
> 
> In Canada, the conditions (no contact and other conditions such as no possession of weapons) will stay until the first appearance in court. After the first appearance, the judge will either keep those conditions,modify,or remove them. Usually, they are kept on in cases of domestic violence. The court date for the actual trial is usually 1-2 years away.Click to expand...
> 
> When is the first appearance usually?
> I know you're saying for the actual trial is 1 to 2 years, but does that include first appearance stuff?
> The police officer who had him arrested, told me that there would be no contact until he went to court, and stated that it would be a year or more before that would occur. So now I'm confused.Click to expand...
> 
> It can really vary. If you call your local crown counsel office (if you can't find it in the phonebook, you can call the local police non emerg # and they will have it). After the police submit the "crown" (the police report/evidence), it is up to the courts and crown counsel (prosecutor) to arrange appearances. If you give them a ring tomorrow in the morning, they should be able to tell you. The police usually don't know,they just get notices a couple weeks in advance for the main trail and don't go to first appearances.Click to expand...
> 
> Thanks :)
> I'll call them first thing next week ; I have too much to do tomorrow already! lol
> 
> Question ; If the conditions are lifted, would i be notified??Click to expand...
> 
> You SHOULD be notified (it is called a k-file notification. k-files are domestics) but you should call just in case. Since your case is a threats file and not an actual domestic assault charge (or is it? I'm not sure), I'm not 100% sure if you would get the notification. The crown should call you and notify you (or the police sometimes come and visit if the crown has trouble getting hold of you).Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah it's just a threat. Not assault.
> So what i'll do is call on monday and find out when the first appearance will be. At least that way I'll know when he's supposed to go, and after that date, I can call the police station and ask if the condition are still applicable i suppose?
> How do you know all of this information??Click to expand...

Well, you could call the police and ask if the conditions are still applicable but sometimes the court records aren't updated for a few days so it's not 100%. The court house has the records and then sends it to the police, often there are delays. 

How do I know? My job.. I am a dispatcher in a police department.. I am the one who enters conditions/confirms/deals with headaches from the courthouse not updating their conditions registry :kiss:


----------



## karamel

aliss said:


> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aliss said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> karamel said:
> 
> 
> because of his conditions for threatening me & baby, he can't come near me til court, and I HIGHLY doubt that his court will be before baby's born. When he was arrested the cop said a year or more ;; and it's only been a month.
> 
> Hi karamel,
> 
> In Canada, the conditions (no contact and other conditions such as no possession of weapons) will stay until the first appearance in court. After the first appearance, the judge will either keep those conditions,modify,or remove them. Usually, they are kept on in cases of domestic violence. The court date for the actual trial is usually 1-2 years away.Click to expand...
> 
> When is the first appearance usually?
> I know you're saying for the actual trial is 1 to 2 years, but does that include first appearance stuff?
> The police officer who had him arrested, told me that there would be no contact until he went to court, and stated that it would be a year or more before that would occur. So now I'm confused.Click to expand...
> 
> It can really vary. If you call your local crown counsel office (if you can't find it in the phonebook, you can call the local police non emerg # and they will have it). After the police submit the "crown" (the police report/evidence), it is up to the courts and crown counsel (prosecutor) to arrange appearances. If you give them a ring tomorrow in the morning, they should be able to tell you. The police usually don't know,they just get notices a couple weeks in advance for the main trail and don't go to first appearances.Click to expand...
> 
> Thanks :)
> I'll call them first thing next week ; I have too much to do tomorrow already! lol
> 
> Question ; If the conditions are lifted, would i be notified??Click to expand...
> 
> You SHOULD be notified (it is called a k-file notification. k-files are domestics) but you should call just in case. Since your case is a threats file and not an actual domestic assault charge (or is it? I'm not sure), I'm not 100% sure if you would get the notification. The crown should call you and notify you (or the police sometimes come and visit if the crown has trouble getting hold of you).Click to expand...
> 
> Yeah it's just a threat. Not assault.
> So what i'll do is call on monday and find out when the first appearance will be. At least that way I'll know when he's supposed to go, and after that date, I can call the police station and ask if the condition are still applicable i suppose?
> How do you know all of this information??Click to expand...
> 
> Well, you could call the police and ask if the conditions are still applicable but sometimes the court records aren't updated for a few days so it's not 100%. The court house has the records and then sends it to the police, often there are delays.
> 
> How do I know? My job.. I am a dispatcher in a police department.. I am the one who enters conditions/confirms/deals with headaches from the courthouse not updating their conditions registry :kiss:Click to expand...

See i figured something along those lines. You knew too much to just know. lol 
But thank you veryy much for the advice! 
I'll probably call next week and find out about first appearances and such!
Again, thank you :)


----------



## daniellelk

karamel said:


> Alright ; last night here was the debate in my household :
> 
> Should I put FOBs name on the BC or not?
> 
> I don't particularily want him to have any rights to the child (mean, i know, but he's not a good person) ; and I couldn't care less about child support. He currently has a 6 y/o that he pays $221 a month for. So it's not like it'd be a substantial amount.
> Even if he were to have rights, I would be telling the courts I only want him to be allowed supervised visitation if anything.
> But ;
> 
> I have a feeling that FOB is going to fight for his rights to this child. But, I also know he can't afford DNA testing or anything if he's not listed as the father on the BC. But I'm sure he'll find a way to pay for it.
> 
> So what do you all think would be easier? Just to put him on the BC, go for sole custody with no access ; or not put him on the BC and have him have to fight for rights (if he chooses to). Like i said, the child support isn't really something I'm worried about ; but if his name is on the BC, then I'll have to go for CS as my assistance with income when the baby is born will make me do so. As a single mother, they'll force it. FOB not on BC means I never have to deal with him again, unless like i said, he fights to see the baby.
> 
> I just really don't know what to do. And I also don't know if it'll come back to bite me in the ass if I DONT put him on the BC, knowing damn well he's the father.
> 
> I'm thinking I should consult a lawyer about the whole thing ; but I'm really just not sure what to do!
> And advice would be amazing :)



Your basicly trying to play god with this baby's life. Even if you do not put his name on the BC, if you end up going for CSA, he can turn round and say he wants a DNA test, if he doesnt have the money for it, they will pay and he will pay them so much back a week/month (i know this as my OH had a DNA test with his child) his EX tried to avoid him access to his daughter, and didn't put him on the BC, but my OH just went to a solicitors and we paid for them to track down his EX so that he could start putting in for visitation, all though his EX as ignored letter from solicitors and mediation, it is going to court.

If you don't put his name on straight away and he takes you through court, and they order you to put his name on the BC then how are you going to feel when your daughter/son grow up and see that there as been a amendmant on the BC? and question you about it?
If your EX is not a threat to your child then why not put him on, you can always say you want visitation supervised.

Look at it this way, how would you feel if your mum didn't name your father on your BC, and you grew up not knowing your biological father?


----------



## aliss

daniellelk said:


> Your basicly trying to play god with this baby's life. Even if you do not put his name on the BC, if you end up going for CSA, he can turn round and say he wants a DNA test, if he doesnt have the money for it, they will pay and he will pay them so much back a week/month (i know this as my OH had a DNA test with his child) his EX tried to avoid him access to his daughter, and didn't put him on the BC, but my OH just went to a solicitors and we paid for them to track down his EX so that he could start putting in for visitation, all though his EX as ignored letter from solicitors and mediation, it is going to court.
> 
> If you don't put his name on straight away and he takes you through court, and they order you to put his name on the BC then how are you going to feel when your daughter/son grow up and see that there as been a amendmant on the BC? and question you about it?
> If your EX is not a threat to your child then why not put him on, you can always say you want visitation supervised.
> 
> Look at it this way, how would you feel if your mum didn't name your father on your BC, and you grew up not knowing your biological father?

The OP karamel is NOT from England and civil family court laws are not the same here in Canada. CSA is not an agency that exists in this country. 

If you read her post instead of assuming that she is like your OH's ex, you would see that there is currently *a current criminal charge and no-contact conditions* against him contacting both her and her child as he threatened to kill them.

So read her post before you assuming she is trying to "play god" with her child's life. I'm not a single parent but I do work directly with criminal law in Canada so I am trying to help her with advice to deal with her situation. Are you here to help too, or judge her without even knowing her situation?


----------



## daniellelk

sorry. It just annoys me when women don't put the fathers name on BC (not just because of my OH's situation cause his ex is just warped in head anyway) and if thats the case with the police and he does try to get contact, the social service's will get involved.
I have a cousin who as 3 children each with a different dad, and she hasn't put names on BC infact only she know's who the fathers are, and a many of time's if sat with the eldest while she's cried because she wants to know who her dad is and darent talk to her mum (who is a alcholic, so is either drunk or in a foul mood, yet the SS wont do anything to help the children)
Iv seen a many a times how it affects a child who's mother has not put the fathers name one BC.
People are intitled to opion's and i did read the posts fyi.


----------



## karamel

daniellelk said:


> sorry. It just annoys me when women don't put the fathers name on BC (not just because of my OH's situation cause his ex is just warped in head anyway) and if thats the case with the police and he does try to get contact, the social service's will get involved.
> I have a cousin who as 3 children each with a different dad, and she hasn't put names on BC infact only she know's who the fathers are, and a many of time's if sat with the eldest while she's cried because she wants to know who her dad is and darent talk to her mum (who is a alcholic, so is either drunk or in a foul mood, yet the SS wont do anything to help the children)
> Iv seen a many a times how it affects a child who's mother has not put the fathers name one BC.
> People are intitled to opion's and i did read the posts fyi.

At this point, I've learned that I am UNABLE to put him on the BC unless he is THERE! And he won't be as he can't come near me due to his conditions. 
So, if you had indeed read all of the posts, you would KNOW this, and wouldn't be judging me or this issue at hand.


----------



## purpledahlia

daniellelk said:


> sorry. *It just annoys me when women don't put **the fathers name on BC* (not just because of my OH's situation cause his ex is just warped in head anyway) and if thats the case with the police and he does try to get contact, the social service's will get involved.
> I have a cousin who as 3 children each with a different dad, and she hasn't put names on BC infact only she know's who the fathers are, and a many of time's if sat with the eldest while she's cried because she wants to know who her dad is and darent talk to her mum (who is a alcholic, so is either drunk or in a foul mood, yet the SS wont do anything to help the children)
> *Iv seen a many a times how it affects a child who's mother has not put the fathers name one BC.*
> People are intitled to opion's and i did read the posts fyi.



And are you also aware how it can affect a childs life if a no-good arsehole of a guy IS on the BC and HE plays god with the mothers and the childs life???? 

If it pisses you off seeing women not putting the names on then i suggest you DONT come into SINGLE parents and judge us for our desicions... which are BEST FOR THE CHILD. If you cant offer help and advice then dont say anything at all cos saying things like you did in the single parents section is gonna do nothing but offend us. Dont you think we put our childrens best interests first??? do you even know the law if he is on the BC ? one experience of a -bad mother-bad choices-father who cares- scenario doesnt make all situations like that. infact its a rareity.


----------



## teal

purpledahlia said:


> daniellelk said:
> 
> 
> sorry. *It just annoys me when women don't put **the fathers name on BC* (not just because of my OH's situation cause his ex is just warped in head anyway) and if thats the case with the police and he does try to get contact, the social service's will get involved.
> I have a cousin who as 3 children each with a different dad, and she hasn't put names on BC infact only she know's who the fathers are, and a many of time's if sat with the eldest while she's cried because she wants to know who her dad is and darent talk to her mum (who is a alcholic, so is either drunk or in a foul mood, yet the SS wont do anything to help the children)
> *Iv seen a many a times how it affects a child who's mother has not put the fathers name one BC.*
> People are intitled to opion's and i did read the posts fyi.
> 
> 
> 
> And are you also aware how it can affect a childs life if a no-good arsehole of a guy IS on the BC and HE plays god with the mothers and the childs life????
> 
> If it pisses you off seeing women not putting the names on then i suggest you DONT come into SINGLE parents and judge us for our desicions... which are BEST FOR THE CHILD. If you cant offer help and advice then dont say anything at all cos saying things like you did in the single parents section is gonna do nothing but offend us. Dont you think we put our childrens best interests first??? do you even know the law if he is on the BC ? one experience of a -bad mother-bad choices-father who cares- scenario doesnt make all situations like that. infact its a rareity.Click to expand...

Well said :flower: 

As karamel said - not everyone has the choice of putting the fathers name on the birth certificate. Where I am (no idea if it's the same in England) the father has to be present when registering the birth so if he isn't interested then it's out with our control.


----------



## karamel

teal said:


> purpledahlia said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> daniellelk said:
> 
> 
> sorry. *It just annoys me when women don't put **the fathers name on BC* (not just because of my OH's situation cause his ex is just warped in head anyway) and if thats the case with the police and he does try to get contact, the social service's will get involved.
> I have a cousin who as 3 children each with a different dad, and she hasn't put names on BC infact only she know's who the fathers are, and a many of time's if sat with the eldest while she's cried because she wants to know who her dad is and darent talk to her mum (who is a alcholic, so is either drunk or in a foul mood, yet the SS wont do anything to help the children)
> *Iv seen a many a times how it affects a child who's mother has not put the fathers name one BC.*
> People are intitled to opion's and i did read the posts fyi.
> 
> And are you also aware how it can affect a childs life if a no-good arsehole of a guy IS on the BC and HE plays god with the mothers and the childs life????
> 
> If it pisses you off seeing women not putting the names on then i suggest you DONT come into SINGLE parents and judge us for our desicions... which are BEST FOR THE CHILD. If you cant offer help and advice then dont say anything at all cos saying things like you did in the single parents section is gonna do nothing but offend us. Dont you think we put our childrens best interests first??? do you even know the law if he is on the BC ? one experience of a -bad mother-bad choices-father who cares- scenario doesnt make all situations like that. infact its a rareity.Click to expand...
> 
> Well said :flower:
> 
> As karamel said - not everyone has the choice of putting the fathers name on the birth certificate. Where I am (no idea if it's the same in England) the father has to be present when registering the birth so if he isn't interested then it's out with our control.Click to expand...

From everything I've read, been told and researched ; the father has to be present at the registration, or has to send a letter saying he gives consent to being named the father. 
As he won't be there, nor will he know when I give birth, it's utterly impossible to name him as the father.


----------



## Moulder86

I put my lil boys dad on his BC thought it was the right thing to do etc and now I REALLY wish I hadn't!! To the point I want to see a lawyer to see if I can get his parental rights taken away or something. He hasn't bothered to see him in about a year. Said he'll pop in and never turns up!

Some people don't deserve to have children and by the sounds of it he doesn't!


----------

