This is our dilema. Our 19 y/o son has a 20 y/o girlfriend who we just found out is 3 weeks pregnant. We also just found out she is going to move to Australia with her parents now in 3 months. What rights does my son ha=ve to this unborn child and the fact she is taking the unborn child to another country. Does he have any rights to stop her from taking his child away. Do we have to wait to the child is born first in another country before we can do anything legally or are we out of luck?

Until the child is born he has no rights,

Sorry until the child is born and paternity is established, he has really no rights ( assuming you are here in the US)
Once the child is born he can file for visitation and other rights, but only after child is born.

Thanks, so once the child is born in Australia, what happens once it is determined he is truly the child's father. Is it totally on him to travel to Australia for visitation or is there any law that she has to make the child available for him to here in the states.

Jurisdiction will be an issue, if it will be Australia law or US law that governs visits and support.
So it is hard to determine which way either court may rule on who pays for visits.

As the other posters have mentioned, there are no rights that can be exercised until the child is born. Afterward, it seems that a lot would depend on the nationality of the child. Is the mother an Australian citizen? If she is, you will have a very hard time using the court system to get the child back into the US. Trying to get a child that is a US citizen back into the country is one thing... trying to force a citizen of another country back into the US is a whole different ballgame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

Jurisdiction will be an issue, if it will be Australia law or US law that governs visits and support.
So it is hard to determine which way either court may rule on who pays for visits.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kcomissiong

As the other posters have mentioned, there are no rights that can be exercised until the child is born. Afterward, it seems that a lot would depend on the nationality of the child. Is the mother an Australian citizen? If she is, you will have a very hard time using the court system to get the child back into the US. Trying to get a child that is a US citizen back into the country is one thing...trying to force a citizen of another country back into the US is a whole different ballgame.

---

Jurisdiction won't be that complicated. Assuming the child is born in Australia, under U.S. state law (in at least 48 states), the Australian courts would have jurisdiction. The child's citizenship would be immaterial.

Now, as to the rights of a father with respect to a not-yet born child, Australia might not have the judicially legislated law that we have here. Who knows, for all I know, Australia might give fathers rights.

AK, correct me if I'm reading the info in the link incorrectly, but the info did seem to only apply to states and territories that have adopted the UCCJEA. It mentions the child's home state, but I didn't see how to extrapolate that internationally. (Again correct me if there is more there than I am reading, or we can fairly assume that this would apply internationally).

I mention citizenship because if the mother is Australian and the father is not listed on the birth certificate, if the child is born in Australia, he/she is not a US citizen. He will have a much harder time in any custody dispute if the child is an Australian citizen. What he is asking is for the courts to take physical custody away from the mother (a citizen), and move a foreign national (the child) back to the US. How likely is that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kcomissiong

AK, correct me if I'm reading the info in the link incorrectly, but the info did seem to only apply to states and territories that have adopted the UCCJEA. It mentions the child's home state, but I didn't see how to extrapolate that internationally. (Again correct me if there is more there than I am reading, or we can fairly assume that this would apply internationally).
...

---

"SECTION 105. INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION OF [ACT].
(a) A court of this State shall treat a foreign country as if it were a State of the United States for the purpose of applying [Articles] 1 and 2
(b) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (c), a child-custody determination made in a foreign country under factual circumstances in substantial conformity with the jurisdictional standards of this [Act] must be recognized and enforced under [Article] 3.
(c) A court of this State need not apply this [Act] if the child custody law of a foreign country violates fundamental principles of human rights."

Thanks for the update... I def. didn't see it.