Separated Parenting Access & Resource Center
crazy gamesriddles and jokesfunny picturesdeath psychic!mad triviafunny & odd!pregnancy testshape testwin custodyrecipes

Author Topic: This Is Wrong  (Read 3018 times)


  • Just Some Guy
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1650
  • Karma: 174
    • View Profile
    • http://www.deltabravo.net
This Is Wrong
« on: Dec 24, 2008, 08:35:32 AM »
[HIGHLIGHT=#ffff00]Why does a court allow this? Because in their eyes, FATHER'S DO NOT MATTER. The father is deprived of his right to be a father, and this child will grow up never knowing who her real father is. Hooray for justice. [/HIGHLIGHT]

Mother allowed to keep baby secret from father
Last Updated: 2:11AM GMT 24 Nov 2007

A woman who had a child after a one-night stand with a work colleague has won the right to keep the birth a secret from the father.

Three appeal court judges ruled that the mother has "the ultimate veto" over who should be told about her baby, and banned social workers from tracking down the father.

The 20-year-old mother had hidden her pregnancy from friends and family, and said that she wanted the girl to be adopted immediately after she had given birth.

However, a county court ordered that her parents and the father must be told after her legal guardian and local authority argued that they should be assessed to see if they were able and prepared to care for the child.

The woman then took the case to the Court of Appeal, where the judges ruled that no steps should be taken to identify the father or tell him about the child, now 19 weeks old.

There was also an order barring the authority from introducing the baby to any of the mother's family to assess them as potential carers.

They had learned about the child only when the local authority made inquiries.

In the ruling yesterday, Lady Justice Arden said the county court judge had made his order because he believed that the local authority had a duty under the law to find out as much information about the background of the family as they could.

But she said there was no such obligation - only a duty to serve the best interests of the child.

The judge said the mother had not realised until a late stage that she was pregnant and the woman did not think she could look after the child.

She kept her pregnancy a secret, living on her own and pursuing a career.

The judge said she asked for the child to be adopted, saying she did not believe her divorced parents could provide a home for the girl.

She stressed that she did not want the father to know anything about the child.

Lady Justice Arden, sitting with Lord Justice Thorpe and Lord Justice Lawrence Collins, said this was not a violation of the father's rights to family life under the Human Rights Act because he had no rights to be violated.

Lord Justice Thorpe said: "The law improves the opportunity of the child of anonymous birth to search out its biological origin.

"However, the ultimate veto remains with the mother. Registers of information are in place to lead the searching child to the mother's door but the child has no right of entry if the mother, despite counselling, refuses to unlock it."

The names and locations of everyone involved in the case cannot be published by order of the court.

The trouble with reality is that there's no background music.

Kitty C.

  • Moderator
  • SuperHero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2612
  • Karma: 938
    • View Profile
« Reply #1 on: Dec 24, 2008, 10:34:06 AM »
My son will be 20 in April and my SS will be 16 in February...........I'm not kidding, this wants me to tell BOTH of them to get vasectomies NOW!  You know damn well this will cross the pond and when it does, the term 'father' will cease to exist.  In order to procreate, all a woman will want is the seed, but the court will say that the resulting child needs NOTHING else to become a well rounded human being.

I'm telling you, this really scares me to death!  It also pisses me off royally, not just for my DH and all the other fathers out there who desperately want to be a significant part of their child's life...........but because they are saying my own beloved father was meaningless to my own life!  That's pure bull***!!!!  Has anyone realized that nowhere in that article does it mention anything about the CHILD's rights??  No!!!!!!  The ONLY one that matters to the court is the mother's......makes me totally ashamed to even be a woman!

They really got me mad now............. 
Handle every stressful situation like a dog........if you can't play with it or eat it, pee on it and walk away.......


  • Private Reserve
  • SuperHero
  • ***
  • Posts: 7924
  • Karma: 591
    • View Profile
Re: This Is Wrong
« Reply #2 on: Dec 27, 2008, 10:57:28 AM »
Part of the article is right, part is just plain wrong.  The court should NOT order that a 20 year must notify her parents or extended family of her pregnancy or her intentions to put the child up for adoption. 

Having said that, the parents (the 20 year old and the coworker) have the right to put the child up for adoption if they so choose but HE has to be told about it in order for him to make an informed decision.
The wonderful thing about tiggers is I'm the only one!


Copyright © SPARC - A Parenting Advocacy Group
Use of this website does not constitute a client/attorney relationship and this site does not provide legal advice.
If you need legal assistance for divorce, child custody, or child support issues, seek advice from a divorce lawyer.