I did not like the TONE that you had when you replied to my post regarding CS. Ya know, we can really do WITHOUT your kind here...as you may have noticed, majority of us here are betrayed spouses working on RE-BUILDING our marriages or xow who have turned to God and accept responsibility for their evil ways in the past. Yea, go ahead and tell me to leave my husband, guess who else is telling me that? Satan. What are you one of his helpers. Well, i'm not interested in what you or he has to say about MY marriage. <p>You are sadly mistaken about my h's name or his last name being given to child on the bc. Do the research before you start ranting off trying to tear me down. It is not going to work.<p>QUOTE by Skittles:
As to his name being on the BC, he doesn't have to sign anything upon birth of the child as far as the BC goes. After the child is born, she can put his name on the BC if she wants to, he doesn't have a say in that. The only way his name would be taken off of the BC is if he was proven(DNA) not to be the father of the child. She may also, if she chooses to do so, give the child his last name. He does not need to consent to that either, because the mother can give the child any last name that she would like to give the child.<p>WRONG!<p>Again, DO THE RESEARCH BEFORE YOU GO OFF NEXT TIME...<p>http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/ecs/program/undercs/default.htm<p>[ January 23, 2002: Message edited by: mnca6713julia3 ]</p>

Julia, <p>As far as my tone is concerned, a letter has no tone only one you give it.<p>I hate to be the one to break it to you, but, yes, she can put his name on the birth certificate. She can also give the child his last name, her last name, or any other last name on the planet. <p>You all have questioned what profession I work in, and the answer is - I'm a Social Worker in a quite populated county of Minnesota. So, please, don't tell me I don't know the law when it comes to Family Court in MN. I am in a courtroom more in a DAY than most of will ever be in your WHOLE LIFE.<p>The Dept. of Human Services site that you posted a link to says clearly that it's not to be used as legal advice, and it shouldn't be. The information set out in the website says basically what I told you when I replied to your posting. I just added more to what the website already said regarding some of the questions you had.<p>In conclusion, maybe you should do MORE research, rather than tell me I haven't done enough. I was telling you how MN conducts business, and I was very realistic in telling you how things will happen for your husband. If you don't want to believe what I said and KNOW to be the truth, you and your husband can see for yourselves after the child is born. I was simply trying to clue you in, I'm sorry if it wasn't what you wanted to hear.

BTW, I know first hand it's possible. I was already divorced by the time I had my daughter, her father was NOT there when she was born, and his name IS on the BC. In MN, the father doesn't have to sign anything. In the event that his name is on the BC, and he is NOT the father, his name can be taken off if he wants it to be.

Quote from Skittles:
First of all, when he goes to court, HE will be the only one allowed into the hearing. YOU will not be allowed in there due to the fact that it will have to do with the paternity issue. It's considered a parental right to be there,that of which you do NOT have.<p>Fine, a letter doesn't have a tone, so why capitalize the word 'NOT? The state can make up all the laws it wants and tell us to do things like embrace diversity (like homosexuality and such), that doesn't mean that i believe in those laws or ways. I am a christian woman struggling to understand God's ways and plan for my life. How's this for TONE... I DO HAVE A RIGHT, IN MY OPINION TO BE IN THAT COURT ROOM BECAUSE GOD HAS NOW ASKED ME TO BE A STEP MOM . I figure if i am going to have a motherly relationship with this child, then i SHOULD have paternal rights too. And i don't care if you think differently. God has showed me one way and if you have a problem with that, take it up with HIM.

quote from skitt:
Another thing, this is just me speaking from experience, don't take it out on the child. The child is NOT the guilty party(ies). He has an obligation toward the child just as well as the mother does. <p>I am not taking anything out on child. Yes BOTH child and i are the innocents here. But unlucky for you, I come first, not child. When my needs are satisfied, then h can worry about oc. My h's obligation is to me first, sorry if you have a problem with that. There are consequences to sin...read your Bible.<p>quote from skitt:
Was your father in your life as child? If he was, then you should know the importance of a dad's role in a child's life.<p>Yes, my father was in my life and still is, he is a wonderful man, same with my Mom, she is a wonderful woman - still married 30 years, that is probably why I didn't ever date married men and had some morals. OW's dad left her and mom at 4 yrs old or something. Then ow's mom got prg by another man, left her mom again. So see the pattern. I know that i am blessed to have had wonderful parents, i realize we don't have a choice, but c'mon being with and trapping mm, that is just appauling.<p>quote from skitt:
I have read some of your other postings, and you are obviously argry at the woman involved. The Devil's Advocate again, if she didn't have the full story, how can you be mad at her? It sounds like he lied to everyone close to the situation, so it sounds like one everyone should be argry with should be HIM! Had that been me(as wife), I would've been out the door in a split second, NO looking back.<p>Yes, my h has hell to pay. I am mad at him and i am mad at her. Maybe if ow would stop showing up everywhere and calling and telling me, "fact still stands, B-, i have his baby and you don't", then calling for no reason and throwing pop cans at the window and trying to rip the cell phone out of my h's hand, and telling him that she wishes he was dead, etc etc, it would be easier to not hate her. But i even struggle with that because MY God tells me to love my enemies.<p>That is all i have to say right now. Oh, my h asked this question...<p>Why are you even here on this site? Do you know that it is called Marriagebuilders? And if so, if there is anything we can do to help you rebuild it, let us know, otherwise, take your 'no tone' letters' and find another site because we, here, are in the business of saving marriages, not destroying them because of certain people.<p>[ January 24, 2002: Message edited by: mnca6713julia3 ]</p>

I would like to interject here. As of 01/01/95, an unwed mother can NO LONGER place the alleged father&#8217;s name on the birth certificate. He must be present and must sign the birth certificate, thereby consenting to his name being placed on the document. Onced he signs his name, the certificate would be the equivalent of the Acknowledgement of Paternity form. Now, if the mother were married and her H was not present for the birth then and ONLY then would she be allowed by the registrar to place her H&#8217;s name on the certificate without his presence. So, prior to 1995, Skittles, you are correct, but from 1995 forward, your information is outdated. Now, as far as the surname of the child, the mother can name him whatever she likes. She could name the child Mickey Mouse if that&#8217;s what she chose to do (I would hope not, though).