[debntxus2]

The father of my child wants to sign over his rights... I want this also... he lives about 150 miles from me and I don't trust him with our child... he has 2 other children and sees them and pays child support for them. He never calls about him or has not sent 1 red cent to help out. SO if he signs over his rights... and I never want to leave himalone with my chid... Question is... Does he still have to pay support... and if he does... Does he have rights to see our child? I will give up any amount of money to have him not to see our child... My child is worth more than any amount of money... Thanks

[stevetcg]

He cannot give up his rights. He can not request visitation and if he does you can request that it be supervised, but he is the father... the rights are his and he cannot give them up unless you are remarried and your husband is adopting.

Even if he were allowed to give his rights up (and he won't be) it wouldn't not change his child support being owed.

[susangpyp]

While child support terminates when parental rights do, courts tend to be very reluctant to terminate parental rights. If he terminates parental rights he has no right to see the child. Consult a lawyer in your state. Some jurisdictions (and judges) will not terminate parental rights unless it's to allow an adoption to proceed. A lawyer in your jurisdiction will know more.

[stevetcg]

While child support terminates when parental rights do, courts tend to be very reluctant to terminate parental rights. If he terminates parental rights he has no right to see the child. Consult a lawyer in your state. Some jurisdictions (and judges) will not terminate parental rights unless it's to allow an adoption to proceed. A lawyer in your jurisdiction will know more.

Not necessarily. There are MANY cases where a parents rights are involuntarily terminated and they continue to be required to pay support.

[susangpyp]

If someone's rights were terminated involuntarily they will most likely be required to pay support but I was talking about voluntary termination (the OP's situation) and most likely they will not be required to pay support but most courts are reluctant to terminate the rights.

[stevetcg]

If someone's rights were terminated involuntarily they will most likely be required to pay support but I was talking about voluntary termination (the OP's situation) and most likely they will not be required to pay support but most courts are reluctant to terminate the rights.

Fair enough... moot point since its not going to happen. But my point is that even if a court WOULD allow it, unless there was an adoption, the child support would not terminate.

For instance:
February 11, 2008
Case Law Development: Termination of Parental Rights Does not End Child Support Obligation

In an unpublished opinion, the Illinois Supreme Court has held that the termination of parental rights does not extinguish a child support obligation unless the child is being adopted. The court relied on the language of the Illinois statute, which refers to termination of parental obligations as to “a child sought to be adopted.” The court stated: "We conclude that, after the entry of an order terminating parental rights, where the child is not adopted, [the Act] applies as its plain language indicates, only where the child is 'sought to be adopted'…. To hold that this language is of no effect, as respondent urges, would render the language superfluous or meaningless." The court rejected the appeals court’s interpretation of the “sought to be adopted” language as including any child 'available for adoption', noting that the legislature could have specifically used this language.

Three judges dissented, arguing that the court’s interpretation created significant inconsistencies in the law, both between the termination statute and the juvenile code and between this holding and prior precedent.

Illinois DHFS v. Warner, Ill. Illinois Supreme Court, January 25, 2008

Nothing in the law distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary termination.

[susangpyp]

But that's one jurisdiction and an unpublished opinion which is not precedent in most other places.

[stevetcg]

But that's one jurisdiction and an unpublished opinion which is not precedent in most other places.

Also true. But again... mostly a moot point since a court is not going to allow a TPR, especially if the intent is to remove a child support payment.

[susangpyp]

I agree that most courts will not allow it but every court is different, every jurisdiction has its own precedent. Which is how lawyers stay employed.

[stinawords]

This thread needs to be combined with the other opened by the same person. They are the same topic. And the answers are obviously going to be the same.