by Vicky Anderson
Dec 18 2007
Liverpool Daily Post
A MOTHER'S determination to offer for adoption a child conceived during a one-night stand will set a precedent for other single mothers and unidentified fathers.
The Court of Appeal decision that an unnamed mother had the right not to name the father of her child paves the way for other mothers to take unilateral decisions on their children’s future.
The mother’s local authority had argued against the woman’s bid to have her four-month-old baby adopted, on the grounds that the family and the father should be approached to look after the child.
But the mother’s refusal to name the father, even with the threat of being held in contempt of court, was backed by the appeal judges, who decreed that the mother has the “ultimate veto” over who should be told about the child.
The Adoption Act states that, in order for a child to be placed into adoption, both parents must give their consent, but the consent of an unmarried father isn’t required unless he has parental responsibility for the child. This father obviously cannot take parental responsibility for a child he doesn’t even know about.
Even if the court makes an order requesting the mother to reveal the identity of the father, how could they force her to?
She could be held in contempt of court but even then could not be forced to say something she doesn’t wish to.
CAROLE ATKINSON is family law specialist at Mace and Jones.
Comments
Disposable Dads and one-night stands
How quickly the moral fabric of our lives unravel when names and identity have to be given for accountabilitiy and responsibility's sake!
Eventually someone will have to pay for the "mistake" adults make for themselves, and that cost will reveal itself in it's own time, but at any point, does any adult ever stop and think for a moment how the "here and now" affects the future?
My own children have a hard enough time knowing only half of their heritage because I was adopted, and their father was not, but at least they have a sense of grounded family-history through him. Why would any woman seek adoption as a form of (post) birth-control? Is there that much anger and resentment against men these days? Or has fear of the unknown made mothers so afraid, they are willing to relinquish their babies, thinking strangers can do a better job than they can do, themselves?
It is a grave mistake to allow the adoption industry to teach the fantasy that mothers can relinquish parts of their bodies to strangers, without having any ill effects happen to her or her child, just because the man didn't return to her, as she might have expected.
A guardian for protection
Why after months after giving birth does this mother want to give her baby away? Can't the court appoint a guardian for the child's protection, without drafting a whole legal adoption? Maybe the mother is depressed and can't deal with the baby and needs a break, and has no idea who the father is.
Just googling the word "guardianship" you can find links like these:
http://www.guardianship.org/
http://www.childwelfare.gov/permanency/guardianship.cfm
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/socwork/nrcfcpp/info_services/guardianship.html
"What to tell the child"
Taken from an adoption website, the following are suggested words of comfort to offer a child when telling him or her the family-match didn't quite work-out as planned.
how-to?
I read the above with astonishment. Is this a how-to-get-rid-of-an-unwanted-bastard guide? What is the purpose of this article? It reads to me like a divorce how-to guide, one non of the couples that divorce can live up to. If adoptive parents were able to do all of the above, there would probably be no disruption in the first place.