[abusymom]

I'm not a legal expert, and I do sympathize, but I have to state this. You keep saying "she's ten years old!".

Yes, she is. You've had 10 years to set this straight. The only reason you're mad about it now is that push has come to shove, but you seemed to be fine with it for the last 10 years.

Like everyone else has stated, it's not the laws fault, it's the people involved. This is 10 years overdue, but even then, you had 2 years to settle it, which you didn't do. You're only doing it now because you're pushed into a corner.

You can't always blame the law. Sometimes you have to accept your part of the blame.

There was nothing to set straight. She has always been in my custody and I am the sole provider. Im the only one on her birth certificate. And why do you presume he just now did it? I'll give you one clue - my ex-husband did it because he hates her bio. He doesn't want her, he wants revenge and this stupid law worked in his favor. If he really wanted parentage, he would have did it in the first place.

[abusymom]

So basically because you all seem to agree with the law - you 1) agree that he shouldn't have to pay child support, 2) should have her name changed, 3) have her non-bio dad added to her birth certificate? Right. Over my dead body.

[Fr_Chuck]

So basically because you all seem to agree with the law - you 1) agree that he shouldn't have to pay child support, 2) should have her name changed, 3) have her non-bio dad added to her birth certificate? Right. Over my dead body.

The law is what will rule, if you attempt to not follow a legal court order, you can be held in contempt of court. And not over your dead body but over your body in jail if you refuse. You will appear in court and you will have a chance to contest things, but when the judge rules, that is what and how it is.

Each area has their own laws, and while it seems wrong morally, laws are not moral, they are laws,

[Alty]

I do agree with the law, but you don't seem to see that the law could have worked in your favor 10 years, even 9 years, even 8 years ago. You're fighting against something that was always in place. Something you could have accessed, but didn't.

Your ex husband may be doing this out of malice, but you don't seem to see your part in all of this, and the bio dads part too. She's 10! This could have been resolved, but you seemed to be happy with the way things were, until this happened. Now it's too late. That doesn't mean that the law is to blame. If it was that important to you, why wasn't it dealt with 10 years ago?

The bio dad should be paying child support, but since he didn't challenge paternity, and you didn't list him as the father, that's not likely to happen, because you both waited too long.

I don't think that your ex husband should be responsible for child support, because he isn't the bio dad. I also don't think that he should be added as the father to her birth certificate, nor do I think she should have to change her name. But again, had this been dealt with when she was born (and you both knew then what you know now about her paternity), then it wouldn't be an issue. Right now you have to deal with the way things are, not what could have been, and sadly, you waited too long.

I understand your anger, I really do. I just don't understand why you thought you could go against the law and still win.

[abusymom]

You also don't seem to understand why the husband is presumed to be the parent of children born to his wife.

Most people don't cheat, or have relationships outside their marriage. If every child born was scrutinized as the product of an affair, boy oh boy. Marriage is a legal institution, and the law presumes that children born to a married couple are biologically the husbands children.

Of course the child he had with another woman isn't presumed to be yours, even though you were married. There's a huge difference between men and women. Women can easily prove paternity. They carry the child! It's very obvious that the child belongs to them biologically. It's not so easy for the man.

Most people don't wait 7yrs to finally file for divorce either. Again, we were separated, living in different houses and we were both in another relationship so there was no cheating. We dissolved our marriage. So, clearly my daughter isn't his - just like his child isn't mine.

[abusymom]

I do agree with the law, but you don't seem to see that the law could have worked in your favor 10 years, even 9 years, even 8 years ago. You're fighting against something that was always in place. Something you could have accessed, but didn't.

Your ex husband may be doing this out of malice, but you don't seem to see your part in all of this, and the bio dads part too. She's 10! This could have been resolved, but you seemed to be happy with the way things were, until this happened. Now it's too late. That doesn't mean that the law is to blame. If it was that important to you, why wasn't it dealt with 10 years ago?

The bio dad should be paying child support, but since he didn't challenge paternity, and you didn't list him as the father, that's not likely to happen, because you both waited too long.

The law I don't think that your ex husband should be responsible for child support, because he isn't the bio dad. I also don't think that he should be added as the father to her birth certificate, nor do I think she should have to change her name. But again, had this been dealt with when she was born (and you both knew then what you know now about her paternity), then it wouldn't be an issue. Right now you have to deal with the way things are, not what could have been, and sadly, you waited too long.

I understand your anger, I really do. I just don't understand why you thought you could go against the law and still win.

Something that was in place, yes. Just like I would be fine if that were still the case. Now, my daughter has to go with my ex-husband whom has been out of my life for 7 yrs only because she was born while we were married. Again, I did file for support with bio dad in 2006. Case dismissed. Lack of prosecution. Plain and simple, a child has ONE father and ONE mother. Why would you think it's okay that he not pay child support but yet get visitation? You think its okay for a man claim parentage but not help support the child?

[ScottGem]

First, you don't seem to have told us the whole story initially. Now you are throwing in details to help your case look better. But they only help it from an emotional standpoint, not a legal one. If you can show me a law that works perfectly in EVERY instance, it will be the first one I've seen. That doesn't mean a law is unfair, badly crafted or onerous. It simply means that on rare occasions the circumstances may not fit the intent of the law.

No one said he shouldn't pay support. If he is the legal father, then he is and should be responsible for support. He had an opportunity to challenge his paternity and didn't. So he has both rights and responsibilities. He has the right to visitation and the responsibility to support. But the law treats the two separately. So you need to file for support. Just because the court is allowing him visitation doesn't mean they will order support. And no, he shouldn't be able to change her name. Again, he had ample opportunity to do that and didn't. I think a court will look at that. However, as the legal father, he can request that he be listed on the birth certificate. I'm not sure how a court will deal with that.

Your original question was about the legal father filing for parentage/visitation. As the legal parent that will likely be granted. The other things you just recently added and can be answered differently.

But the bottom line here is you need to get an attorney to represent you. There are nuances in most laws and an attorney will know what they are and how to work the system.

But I can tell you that your "over my dead body" attitude will NOT sit well with the courts. Another reason you need an attorney, to tell you haw to behave in court. Challenging the law as sick and twisted won't cut it. That's part of why we are reacting the way we are, because if you take that attitude into court it will not help you.

Your strategy should be to try and prove that he is using the law to get revenge, not because he cares for your daughter. That may be hard to prove.

[abusymom]

First, you don't seem to have told us the whole story. Now you are throwing in details to help your case look better. But they only help it from an emotional standpoint, not a legal one. If you can show me a law that works perfectly in EVERY instance, it will be the first one I've seen. That doesn't mean a law is unfair, badly crafted or onerous. It simply means that on rare occasions the circumstances may not fit the intent of the law.

No one said he shouldn't pay support. If he is the legal father, then he is and should be responsible for support. He had an opportunity to challenge his paternity and didn't. So he has both rights and responsibilities. He has the right to visitation and the responsibility to support. And no, he shouldn't be able to change her name. Again, he had ample opportunity to do that and didn't. I think a court will look at that. However, as the legal father, he can request that he be listed on the birth certificate. I'm not sure how a court will deal with that.

Your original question was about the legal father filing for parentage/visitation. As the legal parent that will likely be granted. The other things you just recently added and can be answered differently.

But the bottom line here is you need to get an attorney to represent you. there are nuances in most laws and an attorney will know what they are and how to work the system.

But I can tell you that your "over my dead body" attitude will NOT sit well with the courts. Another reason you need an attorney, to tell you haw to behave in court. Challenging the law as sick and twisted won't cut it. That's part of why we are reacting the way we are, because if you take that attitude into court it will not help you.

Your strategy should be to try and prove that he is using the law to get revenge, not because he cares for your daughter. That may be hard to prove.

First of all, my question was asking "how to remove visitation/parentage from my ex-husband" and clearly you didn't read it. I did give all the facts, I stated she was born durning our marriage, however we were in separate relationships. As per Family Code 7540 " 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." I guess the judge missed that part. Ironically, he wasn't interested in claiming my son whom was also a "child of the marriage", because as I stated earlier, he's not interested in her - it's geared toward her bio. The over my dead body attitude comes from my parental instinct. Thus, this is not your child, it is merely a question and your life goes on. I have the right to challenge the law and trust me, I will.

[cdad]

When were the divorce papers filed in this case? What year?

[ScottGem]

First of all, my question was asking "how to remove visitation/parentage from my ex-husband" and clearly you didn't read it. I did give all the facts, I stated she was born durning our marriage, however we were in separate relationships. As per Family Code 7540 " 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." I guess the judge missed that part. Ironically, he wasn't interested in claiming my son whom was also a "child of the marriage", because as I stated earlier, he's not interested in her - it's geared toward her bio. The over my dead body attitude comes from my parental instinct. Thus, this is not your child, it is merely a question and your life goes on. I have the right to challenge the law and trust me, I will.

Look this is getting us nowhere. You came here for advice about the law. You got that advice and more. If you are going to argue with those people trying to help you at every turn, then there is no point in continuing this.

Did you raise these arguments at the hearing? I suspect not. And you blame this on the judge. I suspect you went into that hearing without a lawyer and you lost because of it. So do the smart thing now and get yourself a lawyer.

We can advise what we know of the law. We can advise how that applies to what you tell us of your situation. We volunteer our time here to help people who need our knowledge and expertise. We don't need to waste that time arguing with someone who doesn't appreciate the efforts we are going through. If you want our help then work with us. Otherwise I'm just going to close this thread.

[JudyKayTee]

So basically because you all seem to agree with the law - you 1) agree that he shouldn't have to pay child support, 2) should have her name changed, 3) have her non-bio dad added to her birth certificate? Right. Over my dead body.

It isn't about agreeing with the law. That discussion belongs on some discussion or pet peeve board, not in the legal forum.

The law is what it is. You want it to be something else, try to get it changed.

You aren't the first person - nor will you be the last - I've heard say "over my dead body" as the Judge's gavel ruled against him/her.

Scott - I'd close it. I see very little of a legal nature here and a lot of discussion about the inequities in life (in general).

[abusymom]

When were the divorce papers filed in this case? What year?

December 2010 - He filed 4 amended petitions. The hearing in regards to visitation with my daughter was on the same day I was in Jury Duty. I called the court and told the clerk but the judge granted his motion anyway.

[JudyKayTee]

December 2010 - He filed 4 amended petitions. The hearing in regards to visitation with my daughter was on the same day I was in Jury Duty. I called the court and told the clerk but the judge granted his motion anyway.

Yikes! When the law doesn't work - it sure doesn't work!

Amazing and embarrassing for anyone involved in any way with the legal process.

I'd be... unhappy.

[abusymom]

Yikes! When the law doesn't work - it sure doesn't work!

Amazing and embarrassing for anyone involved in any way with the legal process.

I'd be ... unhappy.

Then the judge retired. Got a new judge but of course his "hands are tied" and he cannot remove the order. I wish I would have just skipped Jury Duty and risked the warrant.

[Fr_Chuck]

Let me see, risk custody or something about my child ? And being in court is a excuse to miss jury duty. You if you had to go to jury duty, file or have filed before the court time a motion for a new hearing,

And of course a new judges hands are not tied, you file for a new hearing based on new facts or evidence.

[ScottGem]

Then the judge retired. Got a new judge but of course his "hands are tied" and he cannot remove the order. I wish I would have just skipped Jury Duty and risked the warrant.

Why "of course his hands are tied"? I asked a while back about you having an attorney. You didn't answer so I suspect your didn't. An attorney wouldn't accept the hands are tied business. An attorney would have requested a postponement while you reported to jury duty. The jury duty clerk should have let you out or had the judge postpone.

Yes the courts when wrong, but it didn't have to happen if you had representation or even asked the right questions.

[abusymom]

Let me see, risk custody or something about my child ? and being in court is a excuse to miss jury duty. You if you had to go to jury duty, file or have filed before the court time a motion for a new hearing,

And of course a new judges hands are not tied, you file for a new hearing based on new facts or evidence.

Wow. Why didn't I think of that? I was on call and I didn't know if I was to report or not until after 5pm the day before, so clearly that wasn't an option.

[ScottGem]

Wow. Why didn't I think of that? I was on call and I didn't know if I was to report or not until after 5pm the day before, so clearly that wasn't an option.

That makes absolutely no sense. First, as soon as you received the On call summons, you should have gone to the clerk of the court and told them you were on call and may have to report the day of your hearing.

Also, since you wouldn't know you had to appear until after court was closed on the day before, then when you showed up at the courthouse, you go immediately to the head of jurors and explain the situation and ask for a postponement of either your jury service or the hearing.

So you had options. Maybe you didn't understand what your options were (another place having an attorney would have helped). But that doesn't mean the options weren't there.

[abusymom]

It does make sense. He served me with the court paperwork via US mail like 2 days before we had to go to court. But the proof of service he had his girlfriend sign was obviously back dated. I spent the entire morning sitting in a room waiting to be called. I told the woman at the window my situation when I checked in but they don't really care about your story. By the time I got to the judge it was 2pm in which it was too late.

[ScottGem]

So there is your grounds for vacating the judgment, proof of service. And frankly, I find it hard to believe that they wouldn't give you a postponement to attend a hearing, especially if you hadn't asked for a postponement before. I suspect based on the attitude you are displaying here, that you showed some 'tude to the clerk which might explain why they didn't want to accommodate you.