# Father not on birth cert of child



## Moral Ethos (28 Jan 2008)

Just a quick question, If a mother registers a child as father unknown, how long does the father have to get his name on the birth cert. What remedies are available to him? Would he need to go to court?


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

Anything useful on _CitizensInformation _by any chance?

Registering the birth of your baby 

Or on www.Treoir.ie?

[broken link removed]


----------



## Moral Ethos (28 Jan 2008)

Ok all very interesting. But the situations detailed assume co operation between the mother and father. I take it from reading that if there is no operation the courts are required?


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

Anything useful here?

Rights of the unmarried father
Change of name


----------



## csirl (28 Jan 2008)

> If a mother registers a child as father unknown,


 
Its actually illegal for the mother to register a child as "father unknown" if she knows who the father is. Birth registration paperwork is legal documentation. You cant be untruthful.


----------



## truthseeker (28 Jan 2008)

csirl said:


> Its actually illegal for the mother to register a child as "father unknown" if she knows who the father is. Birth registration paperwork is legal documentation. You cant be untruthful.


 
how would you ever prove that? All the mother has to say is that she honestly didnt know who it was.

Moral Ethos - if the mother is refusing to allow your friends name on the birth cert then she equally cant chase him for maintenance? This type of situation sometimes resolves because the mother wants some financial support and WILL become co-operative re name on birth cert in order to grease the wheels for the maintenance payments.


----------



## Moral Ethos (28 Jan 2008)

Thanks for the responses.

My friend wishes to acknowledge his child, but the mother is having none of it.


----------



## truthseeker (28 Jan 2008)

Moral Ethos - a quick google search threw this site up - it discusses a little of the legal situation your friend is in and how to establish paternity:  

[broken link removed]


----------



## ailbhe (28 Jan 2008)

csirl said:


> Its actually illegal for the mother to register a child as "father unknown" if she knows who the father is. Birth registration paperwork is legal documentation. You cant be untruthful.


 

That is untrue. A mother who isn't married cannot put a fathers name on the birth cert if he is not present or doesn't fill in a form agreeing. I know who my daughters father is but as he did not want to be involved I had to leave the space blank on her birth cert. I don't think they put "father unknown" anymore. They just leave it blank. 
Once reistered the birth cert cannot be changed but amendments can be added. So if my daughters father reappeared and consented to going onto her birth cert the space for fathers name would remain blank but we would get an addition onto her current birth cert noting his name as father.


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

The GRO website also has info about registration of births.


----------



## csirl (28 Jan 2008)

> That is untrue. A mother who isn't married cannot put a fathers name on the birth cert if he is not present or doesn't fill in a form agreeing. I know who my daughters father is but as he did not want to be involved I had to leave the space blank on her birth cert. I don't think they put "father unknown" anymore. They just leave it blank.
> Once reistered the birth cert cannot be changed but amendments can be added. So if my daughters father reappeared and consented to going onto her birth cert the space for fathers name would remain blank but we would get an addition onto her current birth cert noting his name as father.


 
From GRO Website:

*Section 2: The Registration Process and the details which must be recorded in the Register of Births: *

Care should be exercised to ensure that the information that is recorded in the Register of Births is accurate and correct based on the facts as at the time of the birth. The information recorded in the Register of Births is outlined below:- 

*Child's Details *

The time, date and place of the birth of the child.
The gender of the child.
The personal public service number (PPSN) of child (this will be allocated at registration).
The forename(s) and surname of the child. Please ensure that the surname(s) appearing in the Register of Births is correct (i.e. is the chosen and agreed surname and will be used to identify the child) so as to avoid any later confusion or difficulties.
*Mother's Details *

The forename(s) and surname of the mother which will be the name by which the mother is/was ordinarily known at the time of the birth.
The mother's birth surname.
All other previously used surnames of the mother (if any) will be included in the Register.
The mother's normal occupation, described as accurately as possible (e.g. “Clerical Officer, Department of Health and Children” *not *Public Servant; “Canteen Supervisor” *not *“Catering”). This is important for statistical purposes. When a parent is not currently employed outside the home the most recently held previous occupation should be given. “Homemaker” is an acceptable term for a parent working in the family home. The term “unemployed” should not be entered in the Register of Births.
The mother's normal address at the time of the birth (even if this has changed in the interim before date of registration).
The mother's date of birth.
The mother's marital status at the time of the birth. (The terms “bachelor” and “spinster” are no longer in use. A person's marital status is either “never married”, “married”, “widowed”, “divorced” or “separated”.
The mother's personal public service number (this can be obtained from the Department of Social and Family Affairs by the mother, if it is not known to her).
Birth Surname of mother's mother.
*Father's Details *

The father's forename(s), surname, birth surname, all previous surnames (if any), normal occupation, normal address, date of birth, marital status, PPSN and birth surname of father's mother will be recorded in the Register in a similar manner to the details relating to the mother.


----------



## csirl (28 Jan 2008)

To follow up on the above - this is an interesting legal situation. The GRO states that the fathers details must be included on the certificate. However, the mother cannot register the fathers details without a Declaration from the father. 

Anyone know if there is a legal obligation on the father to sign a Declaration assuming that there is no dispute over the parentage of the child? 

This is one where it would be worth going back to check the primary legislation.


Asides from the legals, I think that it is morally wrong NOT to have the childs father on the birth cert. Mothers who know should always ask the father to fill out the paperwork and fathers should always be willing to do the paperwork. Remember that it is in the best interests of the child to have these details recorded.


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

csirl said:


> Asides from the legals, I think that it is morally wrong NOT to have the childs father on the birth cert.


You're obviously entitled to your opinion. I don't think it's supported by the law though.


----------



## Thirsty (28 Jan 2008)

> ... mother is refusing to allow your friends name on the birth cert then she equally cant chase him for maintenance


 
Incorrect, there is no correlation between the two.


----------



## Moral Ethos (28 Jan 2008)

I found today out that the father unknown trick is often used to claim social welfare.


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

Moral Ethos said:


> I found today out that the father unknown trick is often used to claim social welfare.


How exactly?


----------



## Purple (28 Jan 2008)

I had an employee who bought a house and then rented it to his partner. She and his two children lived there. She claimed rent allowance and the St. Vincent DePaul furnished the place. He lived with them. I haven’t seen him in a few years so I don’t know if it’s still going on, I don’t know if it was even illegal but that's the standard model.


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

Rent Allowance is means tested in case that matters here. Since you mention illegality I presume that you suspected that it was a possibility in which case one might ask if you reported your concerns to the relevant authorities and, if not, why not? It's certainly not illegal to take charity from the _VdeP _even if you are not poor.


----------



## Moral Ethos (28 Jan 2008)

ClubMan said:


> How exactly?


Claiming lone parents allowance. SW have no one to chase for clawback.


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

You mean when the father is actually living with the mother and child? Then it's up to somebody to report it and for _SW _to detect the fraud. The lack of the father's name on the birth cert is irrelevant.


----------



## Moral Ethos (28 Jan 2008)

I believe that when claiming lone parents the SW ask who is the father. If one is named SW claw back the allowance from the named father. The birth cert with no father protects the father in these situations i.e. SW don't investigate further, regardless of the living arrangements of the parties.


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

Moral Ethos said:


> The birth cert with no father protects the father in these situations i.e. SW don't investigate further, regardless of the living arrangements of the parties.


I find that hard to believe especially if somebody reports suspected welfare fraud or _SW _suspect this themselves.


----------



## Purple (28 Jan 2008)

ClubMan said:


> Rent Allowance is means tested in case that matters here. Since you mention illegality I presume that you suspected that it was a possibility in which case one might ask if you reported your concerns to the relevant authorities and, if not, why not? It's certainly not illegal to take charity from the _VdeP _even if you are not poor.


If it was information I acquired in a personal capacity I might report it but as it may impact on my business and the relationships I have with other employees I would not do so in these circumstances. 
I also find it unlikely that SW would act since  the father’s name was not on the birth cert’s.

I agree on the charity point though I do find the idea of misrepresenting your circumstances in order to get charity reprehensible.


----------



## Moral Ethos (28 Jan 2008)

> I agree on the charity point though I do find the idea of misrepresenting your circumstances in order to get charity reprehensible.


I agree 100%.


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

Purple said:


> If it was information I acquired in a personal capacity I might report it but as it may impact on my business and the relationships I have with other employees I would not do so in these circumstances.
> 
> ...
> 
> ... I do find the idea of misrepresenting your circumstances in order to get charity reprehensible.





Moral Ethos said:


> I agree 100%.


Some might say that the having good grounds for suspecting welfare fraud but turning a blind eye because it might impact on your own business/bottom line or your comfort zone with your employees is also reprehensible.


----------



## Purple (28 Jan 2008)

ClubMan said:


> Some might say that the having good grounds for suspecting welfare fraud but turning a blind eye because it might impact on your own business/bottom line or your comfort zone with your employees is also reprehensible.



Some might say that... 
Some might look at reality and, knowing that no action will be taken by the authorities, make a call based on that reality.

Others don’t have to make those calls and don’t have to consider their own or their employees’ security and can comfort themselves with their self-righteous certainties.


----------



## ClubMan (28 Jan 2008)

Purple said:


> knowing that no action will be taken by the authorities


"Presuming" you mean?


> ... and can comfort themselves with their self-righteous certainties.


Some might not take much comfort from the fact that there are others willing to turn a blind eye to such suspected fraud because their bottom line is more important.


----------



## Purple (29 Jan 2008)

ClubMan said:


> "Presuming" you mean?


 No, I have reported the same thing in the past where a flat was provided for a mother and her three children and the father of those children lived with them. Not only did they SW not act but then they were given a house when the flats were being knocked down he was the primary contact when there were questions about how the house was to be finished. I won’t go into more detail in a public forum but if you are really interested I can PM you with names and locations.


ClubMan said:


> Some might not take much comfort from the fact that there are others willing to turn a blind eye to such suspected fraud because their bottom like is more important.


I presume you mean "line".
I have explained the context. If you choose you ignore or misrepresent it by selectively quoting from it that your prerogative.


----------



## ClubMan (29 Jan 2008)

I'm not ignoring or misrepresenting anything and I don't really have much time for those who prefer ad hominem attacks to arguing their own case...


----------



## Purple (29 Jan 2008)

ClubMan said:


> I'm not ignoring or misrepresenting anything


 I disagree but I can only base that on what I read here.


ClubMan said:


> and I don't really have much time for those who prefer ad hominem attacks to arguing their own case...


Either do I, however it is phrased, so lets just drop it.


----------



## ailbhe (29 Jan 2008)

How typical that a thread which mentions single parents turns into a social welfare fraud conversation


----------



## Purple (29 Jan 2008)

ailbhe said:


> How typical that a thread which mentions single parents turns into a social welfare fraud conversation


The OP brought it up and it's his thread...


----------



## ailbhe (29 Jan 2008)

I know. But it is always inevitable. Even if she recieved maintenance from OPs friend she would be entitled to OPFA, rent allowance etc. Him being on the birth cert or not has very little to do with it on the basis of her entitlements. She would recieve the same amount at the end of the day, be it made up of maintenance and the rest social welfare or all social welfare but of course she must be trying to defraud the system (because that is societies biased view on single parents)

Nobody has asked the OP the reason the mother may have not wanted his friend on the birth cert. Is there a reason? Is she sure that he is the father or does she feel that she and the child are better off not having him named as the father. Has he threatened to take the child from her etc.
I know the thread has to be one sided as there is no way of getting the other side but it does grate that social welfare fraud always comes up whenever a single mother is mentioned. 

So OP, would there be a valid reason(in her opinion) that the mother doesn't want the father named?


----------



## ailbhe (29 Jan 2008)

Moral Ethos said:


> I believe that when claiming lone parents the SW ask who is the father. If one is named SW claw back the allowance from the named father. The birth cert with no father protects the father in these situations i.e. SW don't investigate further, regardless of the living arrangements of the parties.


 

Can I also point out that if a woman is claiming OPFA and is living with ANYONE, regardless of if he is the father of the chld she loses OPFA and rent allowance (unless said partner is not working in which case they can probably both be on UB and claim rent allowance) so the living arrangements of the mother is ALWAYS monitored.


----------



## Purple (29 Jan 2008)

Ailbhe, I see your point on the perception of single parents and I agree that there is often a presumption that they are defrauding the state. In the cases I know of it was not single parents but two parent families who were lying in order to defraud the state by pretending that they were single parent families. 
Ironically a close friend of mind is raising her daughter without the father (who lives abroad and has made it clear that he never wants to see his child) and she has never claimed any SW assistance despite her clear entitlement to it.
So I don’t have a low opinion of single parent families (which are most often women). I do have a low opinion of people who seek to fraudulently claim funds that are meant to help people who are faced with raising a child alone. I also have a low opinion of the authorities who are fully aware of what goes on and turn a blind eye.


----------



## csirl (29 Jan 2008)

> I know. But it is always inevitable. Even if she recieved maintenance from OPs friend she would be entitled to OPFA, rent allowance etc. Him being on the birth cert or not has very little to do with it on the basis of her entitlements. She would recieve the same amount at the end of the day, be it made up of maintenance and the rest social welfare or all social welfare but of course she must be trying to defraud the system (because that is societies biased view on single parents)


 
I agree that the majority of single parents dont defraud welfare, and most dont even claim welfare as are working etc. However, I'll tell you what the fraud is - this is based on the experience of a neighbour of mine.

This neighbour is happily married with young family. However, about 12 years ago he had a child in another relationship. The mother did the birth cert etc. He has paid generous maintenance (a lot more than legally required) ever since the birth of the child. About 5 years ago, he was contacted by Social Welfare who accussed him of not paying child support with threats that he would be taken to court and the money would be stopped from his salary. Luckily, this guy was good at record keeping (as well as not trusting the mother) and had paperwork to prove that he had made all his maintenance payments. The fraud is that the mother of the child was claiming that the father was not around/unknown and was claiming full OPFA AND receiving a very generous maintenance payment from the father (whereas the entitlement is tp OPFA less any maintenance paid). She subsequently got accussed of social welfare fraud etc.


----------



## ailbhe (29 Jan 2008)

I am aware that it goes on. However in this case there is no social welfare fraud. The OP claimed that his friends ex didn't put the father on the birth certificate as it meant she could defraud SW. However, she is not seeking maintenace from the OPs friend on top of her SW entitlements and then not declaring said maintainance which would be SW fraud. In the case of the OP it was wrong of him to jump to the conclusion that this woman has left the father off the birth cert so that she might defraud social welfare as he has said that she wants the child to have nothing to do with the OPs friend. That is not right but it is not SW fraud. But stereotypical views of single parents meant the OP jumped to the conclusion that the said mother must be doing it in order to obtain more money which I was pointing out is not the case.

I was commenting on this case not on the topic of SW fraud.
Thats a whole other thread IMO. And it is not limited to single parents.


----------



## csirl (29 Jan 2008)

Is there any specific reason why the OP does not want the father's name on the birth certificate? 

Including the father's name on the cert does not confer any rights with regard to custody or guardianship - these are determined by an entirely seperate procedure.


----------



## Moral Ethos (29 Jan 2008)

I have no idea tbh. My brother lives with the child and mother and no SW is claimed except for CB. My brother is of the thinking, no father name on BC means little or no standing in a family law situation. She could leave in the morning with child in tow and as he is not on the BC, he has no comeback at all.

I have suggested sitting down with her and putting her straight.


----------



## Purple (29 Jan 2008)

Unless they are married he has no automatic rights. It doesn’t matter what’s on the birth cert.


----------



## Klesser (29 Jan 2008)

The father of my childs name is not registered on her birth cert.  I have never claimed OPF or RA, just FIS at one point by the way.  His name is not regestered because he had a serious accident when I was pregnant and is now very severely mentally and physically handicapped.  When I went to register the birth I was told that he had to be either present or I would need a signed decleration from him stating that he was the father.  I tried to argue but its basiclly the rules are the rules and at that time I did not have the energy to go to court etc. so it remains blank


----------

