What establishes legal paternity - I am not under the false belief that a privately conducted test will give him legal rights over my child. It is merely a tool used to accomplish that. The birth certificate naming him as the father will establish his legal "right". Since we're not married, before his name can be added to the birth certificate, he must sign a declaration of paternity OR submit to genetic testing so that the court can name him as the legal father. The paternity test was requested of me and I agreed. Once they receive the results, they wanted to know if I would "allow" him to be legally recognized as the father by including his name on the birth certificate. I gave them a tentative "yes" because I wasn't sure what the reaction would be. I was surprised to discover that they in fact, wanted this. He wants to recognize this child as his. The only request his wife made of me in that regard was that I not make my son a "Junior". My heart broke for her when I heard her say that. The thought never crossed my mind, but how was she to know that? I'm the evil OW that all but destroyed her marriage….and she has every right to think like that. She doesn't know me from Adam. With time, I'm hoping that I can demonstrate to her that I have honorable intentions and do not wish her harm.<P>Fear, pain, and mistrust is running rampant, but there have been moments where we were able to have productive conversations about issues that were important to us. I think that, despite the current circumstances, we all want to leave room to grow (positively) with this situation. We all concede that we don't know what will happen later on down the line and that feelings, wants and needs may and will most likely change. I'm hoping to set the tone by being fair and reasonable. Even though I'm hurting, I know that I didn't get the worst of it…she did. She has to deal with him and repairing her marriage on a daily basis. I don't. I only have to get over the demise of a relationship that never really was. The child I carry is not something for me to "deal" with…at least not in a negative light. No matter what the circumstances were/are, my child is a source of joy for me. My hope is that, with time, we can learn more about each other and come to a common meeting ground…a place that won't be so painful for all of us, and where we can confidently set aside our fear and mistrust of each other. I know that may sound a little too optimistic and maybe unreasonable, but I would rather be hopeful than to be hopeless.<P>The court issue - The parties in my case have agreed to getting custody settled in court. We each have our own reasons for wanting that done. I have identified my reasons here on this board, and believe that establishing legal custody would be beneficial to all. I have expressed my reasons for wanting to get this done, but what about him/them? Establishing legal custody is a pre-requisite to establishing visitation. Despite all the ups and downs and the major confusion, his wife acknowledged, in a brief moment of sanity for all, that the time may come when he wants to establish some sort of relationship with his child. If he wanted this, she wanted to know if I would allow it and what assurances did he have that I would cooperate. If the time came, I wanted to know what assurances did I have that my baby/child would be returned. The legal findings for the custody and visitation will give each of us a sense of security that our concerns have been addressed and are enforceable. So, no, I'm not forcing them into court. They, like me, have consulted with an attorney and are in complete agreement that this would be the best course of action, regardless of our reasons for wanting it. As for child support. He has insisted on providing for his child because it is his "moral obligation". How do you like that one...NOW he's worried about doing what is morally right. Despite the anger and distrust, his wife and I both had a snicker at that one.<P>Well, I did it again. I got long-winded and probably put you to sleep with my babble. Look, Bystander, I didn't come here to make enemies or to offend anyone, and yet I feel as if I have struck a negative cord with you. I don't want that. Can we call a truce?<BR>

<p>[ May 24, 2002: Message edited by: echo ]</p>

<BR>Ohbratti1,<P>I still see a disconnect in your words and actions.<P>Given that you are worried about the psycho wife, you should withdraw any cooperation in establishing paternity and make them force the issue. If you are truly worried that the wife might try something, it makes absolutely no sense to dilute your custody position, yet that is exactly what you are doing.<P>Now, you state that signing a declaration of paternity is the only way for the MM to establish paternity in order to be on the birth certificate. I haven't checked California law, but lets say you're right. So what? His signature on that declaration only binds him to financially support the child. His signature in no way gives him any custody rights at all! In fact, if you think about it, declarations of paternity hold an very unusual place in contract law. Essentially, the signator assumes a liability with no reciprocal guarantees of joint custody or even just visitation. Men who sign such documents must subsequently seek joint custody in court! From that perspective, its remarkable that *anyone* would sign such an instrument.<P>Declaration of paternity or not, the MM has no custody at all until such is decided in court. Absent a custody decision, you have sole custody of the child. If you allowed your child to visit the MM and they refused to return the child, then they would be guilty of kidnapping. Your concerns that they would not return the child are absolutely baseless. Do you really think a babysitter would get away with refusing to return the child? He would have the same non-claim on the child as a babysitter!<P>OTOH, you are correct that he must have the child support agreement approved by the court in order for it to have legal standing. So if he's sincere in wanting to pay child support, then he absolutely SHOULD have his paternity recognized by the court, and have a joint custody agreement entered (and IMO, he *should* have joint custody, btw).<P>O, I don't have a problem with the way you have worked out an agreement in this case. In fact, I am impressed that you decided not to twist the extortionary CS screw on the MM. However, I bristle at your justifying a custody decision in terms of protecting yourself from the psycho wife. I don't believe you are portraying her fairly, and in any event, if she's really the concern, your actions remain diametrically opposite to optimal.<P>Bystander

CALIFORNIA FAMILY CODE<BR>DIVISION 9<BR>"CUSTODY OF CHILDREN"<P>3010. (a) The mother of an un-emancipated minor child and the father, if presumed to be the father under Section 7611, are equally entitled to the custody of the child."<P>For reference:<P>CALIFORNIA FAMILY CODE<BR>DIVISION 12<BR>"PARENT AND CHILD RELATIONSHIP"<P>7611. A man is presumed to be the natural father of a child if he meets the conditions provided in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section7540) or Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 7570).<P>7540. Except as provided in Section 7541, the child of a wife cohabiting with her husband, who is not impotent or sterile, is conclusively presumed to be a child of the marriage.<P>7573. Except as provided in Sections 7575, 7576, and 7577, a completed voluntary declaration of paternity, as described in Section 7574, that has been filed with the Department of Child Support Services, shall establish the paternity of a child and shall have the same force and effect as a judgment for paternity issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. <P>This, in a nutshell, means that the PRESUMPTION is of joint custody (section 3010), WITHOUT the legal protections offered by a court order. Physical custody is easily transferred, by possession of the child, from one parent to the other. Without a judicial decree, whichever parent has the child has physical custody. NEITHER parent can have sole custody without going to court. Therefore, your belief that the mother automatically has sole custody is incorrect...for the state of California.<P>And, I reiterate, I did not apply the label of the "psycho wife". I merely stated my concerns about her stability and maturity in regard to this matter.<P>

<BR>O,<P>Thanks for the language. However, to the point:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Therefore, your belief that the mother automatically has sole custody is incorrect...for the state of California.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Where does is it say <B>in the language you just posted</B> that a man who has NOT established paternity has custody rights? <P>I stated that the MM must proactively establish paternity in order to secure his custody rights. The language you posted in no way contradicts my statement.<P>Now, let me cite Ca 7573, taken from<BR> <A HREF="http://www.divorcesource.com/CA/CODE/7570_7577.html" TARGET=_blank>http://www.divorcesource.com/CA/CODE/7570_7577.html</A> <P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>7573. Except as provided in Sections 7575, 7576, and 7577, a completed voluntary declaration of paternity, as described in Section 7574, that has been filed with the State Office of Vital Records shall establish the paternity of a child and shall have the same force and effect as a judgment for paternity issued by a court of competent jurisdiction. The voluntary declaration of paternity shall be recognized as a basis for the establishment of an order for child custody, visitation, or child support.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>O, why did you fail to quote that last sentence??? It reads that the declaration only serves as a basis for custody judgment, and does not *establish* custody per se. Thus, a voluntary declaration of paternity can be used in lieu of court-ordered DNA testing for establishing paternity, *but the mere declaration of paternity itself does not establish any custody rights for the father*. And if that's correct, it is entirely consistent with my position that you have sole custody until told otherwise by the court.<P>In any event, I maintain that by agreeing to him signing a declaration of paternity, you are diluting YOUR position as sole custodian.<P>Bystander

<BR>Tryingtobestrong:<P>"I certainly didn't get into this to stir up trouble. I have enough trouble as it is being a single parent and dealing with the father and his W. Don't they ever stop and think about the fact that their is two of them and only one of you. It's like being ganged up on. "<P>Why didn't you save yourself some trouble and really think about that fact that their was two of us...in the first place?????? If you didn't want my H to be father,dad whatever..why did you name your child his last name without asking???????? This is crazy..I had never seen this post until now, I just can't believe you had the nerve to even write that. Sorry Ladies/Gents, but I couldn't hold back on this one.

Blast away, Noodles...you're more than entitled.<P>Catnip =^^=