Posted on 08/08/2007 11:24:50 AM PDT by JZelle
RICHMOND — Barbara Jones has seen them hundreds of times: newspaper ads featuring the name of a woman seeking the father of the child she is ready to put up for adoption.
It is one of the last steps before a mother can legally give away her child without the father's permission. Miss Jones, a longtime adoption lawyer, said most new mothers could live without this burden.
"You expose this mother, who maybe sacrificed a lot to carry this pregnancy because she didn't want to abort the baby and now her name's in the paper," the Fairfax County lawyer said.
That burden is shifting.
Virginia has joined about three dozen other states that have developed registries designed to identify fathers and make it their option to take part in parental decision-making.
"Before this registry, we were totally dependent on the veracity of the birth mother," Miss Jones said. "This way, the balance of protection is phenomenal because any man that wants to know whether there's a child ... merely protects his right by registering."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Register when? After every instance of intercourse? Sounds like a stud book!
Does the father get notified before abortions?
LMAO
This is being sold as a plus for men, when in actuality it’s a tranparent ploy to connect fathers to support payments. Now I don’t necessarily have a problem with that, but let’s address it for what it is.
I bet there are a lot of Mr. Johnson’s in that registry. ahem...
The mothers apparently had no problem during the creation of said child.
call me crazy, but shouldn’t the mothers at least know the names of the guys they are sleeping with?
Having a child out of wedlock and putting it up for adoption is a brave and honorable thing for a single woman to do if she does not want or is unable to raise the child. I can understand a desire to make such an difficult situation a little less difficult.
However, I don't see how a father can surrender his parental rights when he never even knew he was a father. Expecting someone to register any time they have sex outside of marriage is not a reasonable expectation and is also an egregious invasion of privacy.
It is a difficult issue, but this is not a reasonable or acceptable solution.
I wholeheartedly agree. However, in reality that isn't always the case. There is also a serious issue of if the mother doesn't want the father to know that they had a child together.
If he refuses to go through with the adoption and gets custody of the child, she would likely have to pay child support. If she gives the child up for adoption she can get reimbursed for medical expenses and possibly even for time off work up to a certain amount (I'm not very sure about how that works). She also relinquishes her parental responsibilities to the adopting couple.
I don't mean to belittle the sacrifices a woman makes when they decide to have a child out of wedlock and to give that child up for adoption. However, if a woman chooses to do that, there are incentives for her to not tell the father about the child.
Reviews only raise the amount of support; they never lower it.
It makes me wonder if I understand English.
In every other legal cause, it's the responsibility of the moving party to notify other parties to the cause.
This has the effect of lowering the bar...further...for women in regards to family law.
Could he waive any obligation by registering?
(yes, I know, it's a rhetorical question.)
So she has to put her name in the paper. It’s not like everyone doesn’t see that she’s pregnant. I am not sure I get the problem.
Yep! Here’s a boxing glove, now go over there and punch yourself in the face. LOL, I don’t think so.
I don’t blame you.
A young woman who gets pregnant might take a leave of absence from work, or take some time off from college and go live with her parents from when the pregnancy starts showing until after the child is born to attempt to avoid the stigma of bearing a child out of wedlock among fellow students or coworkers.
If she has to put her name in the newspaper where the child was conceived, that option does not exist.
It would seem that she could avoid that is she could contact the father and notify him so the newspaper ad would be unnecessary. It seems like it would be only a very small portion of such pregnancies in which the mother would have no way of notifying the father. It makes me wonder in how many cases the mother is simply unwilling to notify the father, and is hoping that the newspaper ad will not be noticed by the father or anyone that could tie the information in the advertisement to him and let him know.
I don't see any purpose in embarrassing these women who are doing the right things by bearing these children and then putting them up for adoption rather than having an abortion.
However, the father does have a right to know that they have a child and they have the right to assert their parental rights if they choose to do so.
It's not about embarassing them...in fact, it's not about them at all.
They aren't "doing the right thing," BTW...they're making the best of a bad situation, most surely of their own making.
Contrast the rights and responsibilites of fathers in this case, and the rights and responsibilities of mothers...and the options afforded each.
Embarassment seems like a minor issue. It seems more true each day...men have responsibilities, and women have options.
I'm not disputing that they got themselves into their situation. However, I do consider having the child and giving it up for adoption the "right thing" compared to having an abortion.
People make mistakes. Sometimes they make really bad mistakes. However, making a bad mistake in the past doesn't make subsequent good decisions bad by association.
It's not about embarassing them...in fact, it's not about them at all.
It is about them as well. Both the parents are equally guilty. However, the mother had to bear that child during the pregnancy, face the stigma of having it be physically obvious that she screwed up in a very big way.
However, the father unquestionably has a right to know that he is a father, and I don't see any way around a broad public announcement if the mother does not know or claims not to know who the father is.
Contrast the rights and responsibilites of fathers in this case, and the rights and responsibilities of mothers...and the options afforded each.
I agree that the father has rights, and that those must be observed. I only meant that I didn't see a need to embarrass the mother further if it could be avoided. This registry is not remotely close to an acceptable way of notifying the father.
Embarassment seems like a minor issue.
The only place where embarrassment for having done something wrong is minor in a truly amoral society or for a amoral person. If the mother is an amoral person, why did she choose to have the baby and give it up for adoption instead of having an abortion.
It seems more true each day...men have responsibilities, and women have options.
When the mother chose to bear the burden of having the child out of wedlock and giving it up for adoption, she accepted responsibility for her actions. The father in such a case has not had the opportunity to accept or try to reject his responsibility, but your comment that seems to indicate that she doesn't accept or acknowledge her responsibility is very much out of line.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.