Ex Boyfriend wants custody of baby born to married couple

[critterperson]

~The bio. father has every right to his child. Remember, you are only hearing one side of the story. Most likely if the chld is only 3 mos. old, he will get visitation, and eventually overnights. It's not like the child is 12 and the father has just "appeared", he is making a responsible jump in the direction of being a father to his child. Unless he has a history that the court feels will bring harm to that child, be advised that he will be allowed to parent his child. Plus as stated before the new hubby and mommy may get in a little trouble for signing the birth cert. knowing who the real father was. Good luck, every parent deserves the chance to be just that.

Chelle0511,

If she was dating the new guy for several months before finding out she was pregnant it is possible in the eyes of the law that new guy fathered the child, and did the honorable thing and married her for the best interest of the child...The other guy will have to explain to a judge why he wasn't as honorable....and waited 3 months to file his action? He will also have to disastablish paternity of the LEGAL dad and establish his own paternity...Then he would have visitation, child support...etc....

 

[stealth2]

I am not sure if you have a punitive fathers registry in Florida but in Illinois if a man suspects he may be a father to a child born he has 30 days to file with the punitive fathers registry to maintain his rights or risk loosing them.

At least get your terminology right - it's putative.

 

[critterperson]

At least get your terminology right - it's putative.

Thanks teacher- I fixed it

 

[Chelle0511]

Chelle0511,

If she was dating the new guy for several months before finding out she was pregnant it is possible in the eyes of the law that new guy fathered the child, and did the honorable thing and married her for the best interest of the child...The other guy will have to explain to a judge why he wasn't as honorable....and waited 3 months to file his action? He will also have to disastablish paternity of the LEGAL dad and establish his own paternity...Then he would have visitation, child support...etc....

~Yes, and the bio. father can also tell the judge that the mother would not and did not allow him to be active in the life of the child. Maybe it has taken three months to get his ducks in a row. Again, we are talking 3 months, not 3 years. So, you tell me... in this he said she said BS, why would a judge deny the father his right to parent his infant? Maybe she married the "new hubby" in a revenge to elimiate the biological father. He has some work, but he has taken the first step. That deserves respect!

 

[nextwife]

The other guy will have to explain to a judge why he wasn't as honorable....and waited 3 months to file his action?

Um, this ISN"T the 18th century. Mom actually had a choice who to marry and she chose her husband. And there is no way Dad automatically knew that he actually WAS dad, after all, plenty of men have been rushed into marrying someone who stated they were carryinmg their child when it actually WASN'T theirs, or she wasn't even actually pregnant. Any guy today would be a moron to rush into marrying someone they didn't love just because she claimed to be carrying his child!

 

[LdiJ]

Now that everybody else has weighed in here I am going to as well.

No, I don't believe there was anything illegal about your daughter's husband signing the birth certificate. I am pretty sure that in Florida the fact that he was married to her when the child was born made it appropriate for him to be listed as the father. In fact, I think it might even be required in Florida that the mother's husband be listed as the father. I seem to remember reading that.

Its IS possible to fight the ex boyfriend having the opportunity to establish paternity...Consult with a local attorney if that is a route that your daughter may want to consider.

Otherwise, the DNA test will determine who is the father. If its the ex-boyfriend he will get some sort of visitation/custody rights. If your daughter can prove him to be legally unfit to some extent or another (and it appears that might be possible) then its possible that his visitation rights could remain on a supervised basis...they will start out that way anyway.

Realistically, the potential dad has no hope of sole/full or primary custody unless he could prove your daughter legally unfit. Since that doesn't appear to be possible your daughter really doesn't need to worry about that. Realistically a judge won't remove a child from an established custodial situation without serious cause, and that usually means some sort of unfitness on the part of the custodial parent.

The best way that you can help your daughter is to help her hire an attorney. This isn't something that she really should handle without one. There is also little to no chance that a judge would order her to pay his legal fees.

I understand why you didn't include some of the info in your original post...however take a lesson from the bashing you got here. If you go to a board for advice...tell the whole story up front. When you are dealing with legal issues you don't know what is or isn't relevant. As far as I am concerned, anyone who would put a cat in the microwave is seriously "sick"......which is another reason why I think your daughter really does need a good attorney.

 

[critterperson]

~Yes, and the bio. father can also tell the judge that the mother would not and did not allow him to be active in the life of the child. Maybe it has taken three months to get his ducks in a row. Again, we are talking 3 months, not 3 years. So, you tell me... in this he said she said BS, why would a judge deny the father his right to parent his infant? Maybe she married the "new hubby" in a revenge to elimiate the biological father. He has some work, but he has taken the first step. That deserves respect!

Chelle0511,

The bio can TELL the judge anything he wants........wheather or not the judge will listen is a totally different story....The law is based on facts plain and simple he would have to have proof that she prevented him from contacting and/or supporting his infant child. As far as taking 3 months to get his ducks in a row after the baby is born could you imagine if every mother decided to do that? (babies need care from day one...not when you decide they need care) When he found out that this baby was potentially his he had from what I am getting from the post several months to get his ducks in a row...Before the baby was born!

 

[critterperson]

Um, this ISN"T the 18th century. Mom actually had a choice who to marry and she chose her husband. And there is no way Dad automatically knew that he actually WAS dad, after all, plenty of men have been rushed into marrying someone who stated they were carryinmg their child when it actually WASN'T theirs, or she wasn't even actually pregnant. Any guy today would be a moron to rush into marrying someone they didn't love just because she claimed to be carrying his child!

True...But from my experience, a judge will ask him why he waited 3 months (granted 3 months isn't a very long time) BUT there are hospital bills...food...clothing and everything else that comes with being a new parent starting from day 1.....

 

[Chelle0511]

Chelle0511,

The bio can TELL the judge anything he wants........wheather or not the judge will listen is a totally different story....The law is based on facts plain and simple he would have to have proof that she prevented him from contacting and/or supporting his infant child. As far as taking 3 months to get his ducks in a row after the baby is born could you imagine if every mother decided to do that? (babies need care from day one...not when you decide they need care) When he found out that this baby was potentially his he had from what I am getting from the post several months to get his ducks in a row...Before the baby was born!

~Ok, debate complete. The poster was asking what may happen and I was giving her some examples. She needs to be prepared. Marrying another man did not and will not terminate this mans rights. Bio dads and moms with worse history than this dads are granted full visitation+ more often than you'd imagine. Not that it is right by any means but it does happen. More often, kids do grow up and become responsible parents. My point... as the father of this child he deserves a chance

 

[LdiJ]

~Ok, debate complete. The poster was asking what may happen and I was giving her some examples. She needs to be prepared. Marrying another man did not and will not terminate this mans rights. Bio dads and moms with worse history than this dads are granted full visitation+ more often than you'd imagine. Not that it is right by any means but it does happen. More often, kids do grow up and become responsible parents. My point... as the father of this child he deserves a chance

Actually...since this man isn't the legal father of the child he doesn't currently have any rights to terminate. The woman's husband is the current legal father and its HIS rights that the potential bio-dad would have to terminate in order to establish his own rights. Its not 100% guaranteed that the potential bio-dad can do that.

You are looking at this from the standpoint of a standard "out of wedlock" situation (or even a situation where another potential dad, not married to the mother, signed the BC...which isn't the case here). The fact that mom was married when the child was born IS legally signficant.

That doesn't mean that the potential bio dad can't establish parental rights...but it does mean that it may not be as simple as you may believe.

 

[Chelle0511]

Actually...since this man isn't the legal father of the child he doesn't currently have any rights to terminate. The woman's husband is the current legal father and its HIS rights that the potential bio-dad would have to terminate in order to establish his own rights. Its not 100% guaranteed that the potential bio-dad can do that.

You are looking at this from the standpoint of a standard "out of wedlock" situation (or even a situation where another potential dad, not married to the mother, signed the BC...which isn't the case here). The fact that mom was married when the child was born IS legally signficant.

That doesn't mean that the potential bio dad can't establish parental rights...but it does mean that it may not be as simple as you may believe.

~Yes LdiJ, but please remember that this couple was aware of the biological father when they falsley signed the birth certificate. No it is no 100% guarnateed, but very likely that the bio father will be able to establish paternity and gain rights to the child. If it worked like that, hell thousands of women would wed other men during their pregnancy to keep the bio father (that they happily spread their legs for) out of their child's life Really, if this man is not a mass murderer or suffering major health problems, he is going to get some sort of visitation to his child. The child is not old enough to have established a relationship with the man playing daddy so it's not as if he is ripping the child from his family. Now, custody that is a hard fight but visitation I'd almost bet my little toe on

 

[bronxmommyof4]

what a jerk!

this guy shouldnt have threatened to take the baby away either-that can be used against him.if he is the father,and unless he can prove the mother unfit,he wont get custody.

 

[Chelle0511]

this guy shouldnt have threatened to take the baby away either-that can be used against him.if he is the father,and unless he can prove the mother unfit,he wont get custody.

~This sentence has the most rediculous grammer and punctuation that I refuse to reply

 

[seniorjudge]

~This sentence has the most rediculous grammer and punctuation that I refuse to reply


S'il vous plâit, qu'est-ce que c'est la <<rediculous grammer>>? Merci beaucoup.

 

[stealth2]

Really. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Chelle - if you're going to call someone on grammar & punctuation, at least make sure yours is impeccable.