My wife has a 3 yr-old son with a man and they were never married. I have known my wife since we were kids so I was around this child since he was born. The man found out the child was his when he was about 1 and never did anything to acknowledge him or pay any type of support. He decided to take us to court after we were married and I started the adoption process. The Judge on Monday terminated his custodial rights and parental rights making him a 3rd party due to him not acting within the 1- year requirement as per the child code. However, the judge stated that as the biological father he should still be given visitation even though he has no rights. Does anyone see this as a loophole? You just have to give up your rights and you don't have to pay support but you still get to see your child? He is hindering my chances of developing a stronger bond as the LEGAL father.

As a biological parent that signed parental rights away so that my child could have a better life--you're being selfish.

The child will know YOU as its father. Just because someone else is ALSO the child's father has NOTHING to do with the bond you develop with the child.

Would you say a child couldn't have a biological father and a stepfather, and have a better relationship with the stepfather? What about a child having grandparents and parents--can grandparents not have any relationship with a child simply because they're not the LEGAL parent?

I think YOU need to rethink your attitude. Visitation OFTEN happens in adoptions now--it's called open adoption.

What does it hurt you to let the guy see his kid--that he's letting YOU raise--every once in a while?

There is a difference here. You are not obligated to allow visitation. "Should" you said and I would assume that is what the judge said too.

The judge took away a man's child. The judge is only human... and that is something hard to bite down on. All he did was ask you to have some compassion for the kid's bio father.

Its not a loophole... its trying to be more humane.

The problem is we tried the whole letting him see him thing and while my wife was in China for 10 days he was supposed to spend the weekend with him and return him and He decided it would be best to take the child and hide him at someone else's home refusing to answer our phone calls and tell us his whereabouts. This guy is a loser who is only worried about his son when it is convenient for him. He is more worried about getting drunk at the bar than picking his son up on Thanksgiving day. Now do you see a little bit of insight into why we want this?

Except he has no legal rights so you don't HAVE to allow him to take the kid. And if he does and refuses to return him it is kidnapping.

The judge *asked* you to allow visitation, not ordered it. If the guy cannot play by your rules, you don't owe him anything. Compassion only goes so far.

Personally I would not allow him to take him anywhere unsupervised.

Visitation means "visiting".

In your presence, preferably.

You don't have to let the guy TAKE the kid. You don't have to let the guy SEE the kid, legally. However--the kid's going to go looking for his biological father at some point. Nearly all adoptees do, if for no other reason than to get medical information and information about their biological history. Wouldn't you rather have the kid growing up seeing what a loser this guy is, than having him build up an image of this "perfect" absent dad that he goes to find and thinks that he likes better at 16?

Well I understand... but the thing is we are being MADE to give him visitation right now not by choice. That is the whole problem for now

I can't decide which of your concerns - the first, that the father is interfering with the bonding process - or the second, that the father hid the child - is your reason for posting of if you've changed gears here.

Did the Court ORDER that the father is entitled to visitation? If there is such an Order, go back and get it revisited, presenting evidence of the "hiding" of the child, requesting supervised visitation. If not, talk to the father - I don't see why you are adversaries in this. The person who will suffer for the mistakes of the adults is the child and I would think, as adults, you could work this out.

You didn't tell us that. You told us the judge asked. Asking is a huge difference from ordering.

What does the visitation order say?

We filed an exception to prescription terminating his rights because he failed to do anything for the child. He asked for visitation and the judge granted it. We were made to give him visitation. My wife is the one who wants him to have nothing to do with the child. She is in the same situation of not knowing her biological father and is extremely happy with it. Those questions will have to be answered in the future though. We did try at first to allow him to see the child and after many let downs and the entire hiding the child incident which left the child with pneumonia we decided that the best interest of the child was for me to adopt him and continue to provide all of the financial, emotional and mental support that I always have, just with rights. I love him and will do anything for him. We are not above letting someone have visitation and it is incredibly hard to show all of you the facts and turmoil we have had to deal with to bring us to this decision. My original question was why would a Judge grant visitation to a biological father who had nothing to do with a child and did all of the behavior before mentioned and more, when his parental rights were terminated. Technically being a third party, he should be treated as anyone else is his rights were terminated and the decision should be up to the legal parents to decide who gets visitation.

While most of us understand the pain that comes with loving children, we try not to focus on that here. This is a legal forum so we try to distance ourselves from the emotion and just provide factual information similar to what you find in the court.

Why would he grant visitation... hard to say really. And since it is court ordered, you are required to abide by it. But that doesn't say that you are also not entitled to appeal or file for modification.

But... GET A LAWYER. If you appeal this decision it might also affect the adoption status. ONLY A LOCAL LAWYER can tell you for sure.

I agree - the legal parents should be the ones to decide and I cannot understand why he was granted visitation. I would immediately seek legal counsel and if nothing else, have his visitation made to be supervised.

We have a lawyer and my Mother in law works for a lawyer out of parish but our lawyer is basically filing everything we give him and we are doing his job. No one can understand why he granted visitation and I have found three separate cases through the 1st circuit court of appeals which handles our case that have overturned the same style cases. We are giving the lawyer an opposition to file and if he does not agree he will be fired and we will seek other counsel. I basically was just wondering if anyone had heard of a "non-parent" granted visitation like this. Very odd situation because it seemed to me like it would be a loophole for deadbeat dads to find a way out of paying child support but to still get visitation.

Im not an expert, but I have never heard of anything like that happening. Ive heard of judges *asking* to allow visitation, but never heard it being ordered.

Personally, I wouldn't wait to fire your lawyer. You are paying him a lot of money. If you are unhappy with his level of competence or service, kick him to the curb. This is your kid we're talking about. Hurting the feelings of some lawyer should be the least of your concerns.

Here is the answer for you. The reason visitation may have been granted is because there are 2 types of adoptions.. Open and Closed. In cases where the child knows the bio parent courts have allowed visitation. The other thing Im seeing here is a pattern of confusion on your part about getting your story straight. It keeps changing every time you post. If that's how it went in the courtroom then you were very lucky to get custody because you keep contradicting yourself.

Yes, I've heard of these agreements as part of the adoption "package." Not unusual for birth parents to be allowed contact with the child.

As far as why did the Judge rule in this fashion? Only the Judge knows that.

It would be helpful if all the information posted would be posted at one time and in a consistent manner.

This is absolutely not correct. There is no order (that I can see) for supervised visitation. If the OP follows your advice he will be in contempt of a Court Order.

No party can change the provisions of an Order. Only the Court can do that. The OP needs to go back to Court if he is unhappy with the Order and attempt to modify it.

You continue to post inaccurate legal advice which could cause the OP a great deal of expense and trouble - what is your experience/background?

Very frankly I am concerned because you continue to post "do it yourself" information on the legal threads as "the answer" and yet the information you post in answer to questions is very far from correct.

Another good reason to consult with an Attorney - your posts tend to be a very bad advertisement for the sites you post.

My story never changes. I just didn't go into the greatest detail. My original question was if a biological father who has had nothing to do with the child gave up his rights should still be granted visitation by a judge. When everyone told me I was selfish I began to explain a little deeper into the story. I have never "changed" my story. This isn't a story it is my life. I am coming on here to ask a broad legal question to people in other states to see what the response is so do not criticize my moral character for seeking answers. I see that as bad publicity for the site if everyone who comes here to ask questions is criticized.

Oh and the adoption was something totally separate and due to him losing his rights he could not protest. My mother in law drew up the document so we know what is in everything we file for.

You were given a broad legal answer to your broad legal question. That doesn't mitigate the fact that your motives were initially suspect and you left a lot of salient detail out. Your moral character factors in to this. There are legal answers but just because something is legal does not mean you are "right" in seeking it. Everyone here is answering your questions with no compensation and we are under no obligation other than our own free will. Morality plays a lot into motivation, especially since many of us have been party to similar situations on one side of the fence or the other.

Some of us have been on both.

This site is free - it does not seek publicity. I would imagine that this site is COSTING someone something, so in essence, they are paying for your answers.

If the adoption was not a part of his termination of parental rights, it has absolutely no weight in the decision of the court. The fact that you have since adopted him means nothing to the original court order.