 |
Bit bitter, aren't you Jenny?
Most judges will NOT allow relinquishment without someone stepping up to adopt, with or without child support being an issue.
It does happen occasionally, but that is NOT the majority of the experiences out there.
Sure, it happened for someone you know--but are you a judge? A lawyer?
Unless you can quote the specific law that allows this, and which state it happened in, then don't presume that no one here knows what they are talking about.
I want to chime in on this one that even if the OP wants to play his chosen role of being cold and uninvolved in the child's life, as some mission to prove his rights not to be bothered with the unwanted results of his actions, saying that it would interfere or cause problems in his life, that he wants no part of, that the OP will be judged not only by those on here, but also by people in his life. Everyone from his parents, current wife, kids, or acquaintances will judge him by his dedication or principle to follow through on his abandonment of the child. Refusing to acknowledge the child will not solve all of his problems, he is just stubbornly adhering to his actions and feeling justified in not becoming involved based on wanting to have it his way. Shutting the kid out isn't going to gain him any respect from anyone. The OP can take his denial to the grave with him along with the knowledge that sometimes it doesn't matter how right you think you are, not accepting certain responsibilities makes you less of a man.
Not bitter, just strong, the state was al. and I told him that the laws may be different where he is. Where have you been? Again my statement offends for no reason. The song remains the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Synnen
Honest to goodness, Jenny--it's your attitude that rubs me wrong.
Seriously--no one here knows you well enough yet to let snippy little comments like "where have you been?" and "please stop targeting me when you don't know what youre talking about. thanks" to people that have been answering questions like this for quite some time.
Look in the archives, and you'll see what I mean.
But--the whole "holier than thou" and "I know everything" attitude isn't helping you here.
Your statement offends because of your "tone" and your wording.
I must have miss understood the tone of your wording as you spoke to me and scotts as well see I was speaking to the other gentleman and not you but you took it upon yourself to butt in as did scott. '' please stop targeting me was a statement made to him because no matter what site I'm on he's there to bully me and you were very sarcastic to me, when it had nothing to do with you. If you think I am going to tuck my tail when I've done nothing to you then your wrong. I want to speak to these people just like everybody else without being harassed. Now leave me alone and speak to the op not me. ThanksQuote:
Originally Posted by Synnen
Again, you need to get the chip off your shoulder and read what people say, not what you think they said. I said in most jurisdictions that wouldn't happen. I don't know the full circumstances of your friends case, so I can't say why it was allowed in his case. But it doesn't help people to talk about the exceptions instead of the rule.Quote:
Originally Posted by jennyrena
Nor am I targeting you. I responded to this thread before you so its on my subscribe list, that's why I saw your post. As far as my knowing what I'm talking about, I stand by my record of accuracy on this site (or any site I participate on). I don't post anything unless I am sure of myself. That doesn't mean I don't make mistakes, just that they are rare. This site has rules about attacking people and comments like that are against those rules. If you don't stop you will find yourself suspended or banned.
Nor am I the only person here telling you that you need to curb the 'tude. Synnen's response here is just another example.Quote:
Originally Posted by jennyrena
You also, clearly, don't understand how sites like this one works. Once you post something it becomes open for anyone else to comment on. We pride ourselves on the accuracy of the advice given out here. So when we see advice that is misleading, prejudiced or just plain wrong, one or more of the regulars will speak out against it. Its not about you but about maintaining the high quality of advice being given here. You aren't being harassed, but your responses, some of which have been inaccurate, biased have elicted comments to point those things out. They will continue to be pointed out wherever they are posted.
I believe the answer is no in most cases.
I don't want to be labeled as bitter but I am angry and have learned a lot the last 2 years. I was in a two year relationship and got pregnant. We lived together in my house.The relationship was good sometimes but most of the time it was abusive and callous. My ex-boyfriend cheated on me with 4 women. When I first found out I was pregnant my first reaction was to have an abortion. He actually talked me out of it. The funny thing is the baby made me a stronger woman. I broke up with him in my first trimester. Before the break up we were to name the baby after him (MRJ III). He would talk to my stomach,rub my belly, the whole bell and whistles. After we broke up... nothing. My son is almost 11 months old and he has never seen him (except for when he humiliated me in asking for a paternity tests). On top of that he has had us in and out of court trying to avoid helping me. I don't contact him or talk to him. Although I am a single mom I am a happier person and a great parent. My child's father is walking around with I-phones,a porsche, and a rolex but has never offered me a penny towards our child. You would think I was a one night stand. The crazy thing is his family and friends support him and believes everything he says. We went from spending Xmas with his parents to no one in his family sending my son a Xmas present. My point is people are a-holes and will find anyway and do anything to satisfy their needs.
You would think your wife would step up and demand you be a parent but oh well. I am sure as long as her family is OK then its not her problem.
Every mother tries to keep their child from pain and this mother is trying to help her child have his father in his life. Everyone can try to answer this all day and the simple truth is that the laws are different from place to place. The only way to answer this is for you to call a local attorney in your area. Someone I know signed away his rights and remains paying support to the dhr to replace the money that they supply to the mother. So it is different all over. I think the comments on here are most likey because there are so many kids without there mom or dad and it messes them up. You may be a decent guy, we don't know that. You may be young and haven't considered it all. Your significant other may not want you to be a part of this child's life. You most likely don't want my advise, if so then don't take it. If it were me ( and it's not) I would continue paying the support without any further legal actions that you can't take back.
And see how I feel a little later down the road. We change each day and you don't know your tomorrow. Only consider how you would feel at 16 coming to your dad and him saying no get out of here I wanted you aborted. I don't say this to be mean. At first I thought , poor kid, this is going to be his life ,the same one that I had to have(only it was my mother)and I looked at my kids and I cried. But I know that our lives turn out the way that they are suppose to. I hope you come back in the future and let us know your situation, I'll be thinking about the child and wondering how things turned out for him. Good luck in your life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jennyrena
You need to leave posts like this, and merely report any improper posts, starting to respond back to others will only make issues worst.
I would have normally deleted this post since it was directed toward others, but left it so as to related to what not to do.
I will not judge you , if you terminate your parental right you are still obligated to pay child support until the mother remarries and the child is adopted. If the child is adopted you are no longer obligated to pay child support.Quote:
Originally Posted by DONTwantPR
You cannot force someone to be a parent if they do not wish to be. You cannot force yourself to feel what is not there to feel. A child does not deserve to be with someone that does not want to be with him/her. It is an unfortunate situation, however you have at least taken financial responsiblility which is more than many other accidental parents have done. Things happen in life, some of them are unpleasant but must be dealt with.
The situation is better the way it is. If you terminate the parent child relationship you are still obligated for support, however, you are no longer legally the parent of the child and she would be out of line to harass you any further. If you terminate parental rights and you are still harassed you may need to seek a restraining order.
Whether anyone agrees or not.. you do have rights. You also have a duty to protect your family against potential harm.
Comments on this post
jp242 disagrees: No judge will let him terminate his rights. You need to go back and read the other posts and see why this is true. A TPR means all obligation to support ends. He would not have to pay child support
JudyKayTee disagrees: Absolutely not. What is your source?
While I agree with jp that no judge will let him terminate his rights, its not 100% that it will terminate support. Some areas do treat a TPR that way. Others separate parental rights and responsibilities. So termination of rights doesn't end support.
But the bottom line is that no court is going to terminate rights just to allow the parent to get out of paying support. So the effective result here is that a parent can't give up rights to get out of paying support. Either the court won't grant the TPR or if they do, then it won't affect support.
Hello Don't:
Didn't I read that you want to make sure she doesn't drop off your child one day? What makes you think that terminating your rights will stop her from doing that? And, if she does, who are you going to call? The "rights" police?
excon
PS> Ya know, having a kid around isn't necessarily bad. You could even grow to like 'em. And, they're REALLY good to have around when you're old.
I will not judge you as it is not for me to judge.
You asked a simple question you should have an answer. If you terminate parental rights you still will be liable to pay child support. You will not longer be the legal (notice I did not say biological) parent of the child. You will have no rights to the child and no obligation other than support.
Sometimes unfortunate things happen in life. It is better for the child if things stay as they are. You cannot force love for a child for whom you do not feel it and you cannot force fatherhood on someone that does not wish it.
You are taking financial responsibility and that is more than other biological parents do.
If the mother persists in harassing your family it is within your rights to get a restraining order. Yes, you make a mistake... all of us do. You also do have rights, feelings and a life.
Shirley
[QUOTE=Wildsporty]I will not judge you as it is not for me to judge.
You asked a simple question you should have an answer. If you terminate parental rights you still will be liable to pay child support. You will not longer be the legal (notice I did not say biological) parent of the child. You will have no rights to the child and no obligation other than support.
Sometimes unfortunate things happen in life. It is better for the child if things stay as they are. You cannot force love for a child for whom you do not feel it and you cannot force fatherhood on someone that does not wish it.
You are taking financial responsibility and that is more than other biological parents do.
If the mother persists in harassing your family it is within your rights to get a restraining order. Yes, you make a mistake... all of us do. You also do have rights, feelings and a life.
The termination of rights if the child is not adopted has to vary from State to State - does anyone have a definitive answer?
There is no definitive answer.
It varies from state to state and from case to case, from my understanding.
It would have to go to court, and a judge would decide what was in the best interest of the child.
The termination of rights if the child is not adopted has to vary from State to State - does anyone have a definitive answer?[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately that varies from state to state depending on the state laws. In some states if parental rights are terminated support is not required.
The QMCSO(qualified medical child support order) and the NMSN (National Medical Child Support Notice) are national. They are regulated by the federal government for medical support.
Since we do not know which state the person asking the question resides in we do not have enough information to answer the state requirements. The questioner is not questioning whether he must pay support but can he pay support if he terminates his parental rights.
If we know what state I can tell you what the rules are for that state.
Shirley
Different States have different rules. Some states allow voluntary termination of parental rights, some states do not. It is usually a Social Services Call in the state in question.
Here is an excerpt from one state's reason to terminate rights to a child.
What is a voluntary relinquishment of parental rights?
A parent may voluntarily relinquish (give up) his or her parental rights by signing one of the following documents:
• A relinquishment and consent to adoption;
• A denial of paternity;
• An acknowledgment of paternity and a denial of any interest in custody of the child.
Maybe there is more than one right answer and more than one wrong answer. I would say to the poster... check with an attorney and with the rules and laws of the state in which the child resides.
Shirley
A parent may voluntarily relinquish (give up) his or her parental rights by signing one of the following documents:
• A relinquishment and consent to adoption;
• A denial of paternity;
• An acknowledgment of paternity and a denial of any interest in custody of the child.
**** relinquishment and consent to adopt, if the custodial parent has a new partner ( married in some states) and the new partner wants to adopt, then they can sign the rights to the child away, so an adoption can be done.
Denial of paternity, you basically prove you are not the father
Acknowledgement of paternity and denial of any interest, is where you are the father, but want nothing to do with the child, this is sometimes given, but not usually, but the parent would still have to pay child support.
This is what the original poster was wanting to do.
It is allowed sometimes in some states, but not often.
Ok-sorry but I will re-post...
Voluntary Termination of Parental Rights
Parental rights may be terminated voluntarily with the written consent of a parent who for good cause desires termination. Even if both parents are in agreement that parental rights should be terminated, the Court must address whether the termination is occurring for good cause. "Good cause" is not defined in the statute.
In the case entitled In re Welfare of All, 304 Minn. 254, 230 N.W.2d 574 (1975), the Minnesota Supreme Court examined the purpose and intent of the statute to determine when good cause could be found. The purpose of the statute is:
First, to enable the judicial system to legally remove a child from a destructive or unhealthy home environment without the consent of the natural parents, and,
Second, to facilitate adoption procedures by providing a means by which existing parental rights may be voluntarily terminated.
In light of these purposes, the Minnesota Courts of Appeals have consistently ruled that a voluntary termination of parental rights for reasons other than to facilitate adoption works a substantial detrimental effect on a child, who will be forced to look solely to his custodial parent to meet all of his needs. See Matter of Welfare of J.D.N. 504 N.W.2d 54, 58 (Minn.App.1993).
The effect is that District Court Judges are extremely reluctant to terminate parent's rights voluntarily and certainly not where the termination is not agreed upon by the custodial parent. It is also clear under Minnesota law that a non-custodial parent cannot claim that the termination of parental rights is being requested in order to remove the child from a destructive or unhealthy home environment, since the petitioning party is not custodial parent. The likelihood of obtaining an order terminating parental rights is also reduced if the custodial parent is provided public assistance through the county. Obviously, the county does not want to financially support children when a parent who has that obligation is available. Even a non-custodial parent's lack of contact with a child and belief that the parent could not care for a child financially may insufficient to provide "good cause" for a voluntary termination of parental rights.
It is same in all states-for example IN RE: JAMES G. AND EMMETT M. L. III
-SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA
Child Abuse and Neglect Proceedings Rule 35 (2000). While the statute and the Rules demonstrate a strong concern that any so-called voluntary termination of parental rights truly be a voluntary decision, i.e. made with an understanding of the consequences and free of duress, they do not authorize the Department, by withholding its agreement, to preclude a circuit court from accepting a parent's truly voluntary agreement to the termination of his or her parental rights.
BTW I can give you examples from all states.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:34 PM. |