fathers who want to raise their baby alone?
 

if a mother doesnt want to keep her new born baby and has split from the father and says she wants to put it up for adoption? but the dad wants to raise the baby, but the mother doesnt want him too because she feels a baby must have mother?

what is the process for the father to try and become sole guardian?

I would imagine the Father would have to go to family court and apply for sole custody?

I would imagine legally if the mother doesn't want the child then the other "natural" parent is solely responsible for the child.

If that parent waives his rights THEN the child will be taken into care and eventually adopted.

The Father does NOT need to apply to any court to have custody of his own child..!!!





.

If the mother leaves then the father is left holding the baby. I don't think she could insist on the baby going up for adoption.

If the couple isn't married then he would have to apply to the court if the mother was contesting it. Atleast that's how it would work here anyway. It's not right imo but that's how it is, the laws need updating badly.

I'm assuming the truth means that the mother had the child after the couple broke up and has the baby in her custody? If the father already has custody then it wouldn't be an issue

Ah, of course, he said they'd split.

If he's on the birth certificate he'd automatically be "first choice" unless the mother had a good reason for saying he shouldn't be, e.g. homelessness, substance abuse, violent criminal, etc.

If he's NOT on the birth certificate the child would likely go into the system, at which point there could be a DNA test done, after which I'm assuming he would have custody rights (again, unless there is some sort of reason for this not to happen as above).

That's for adoption by strangers, by the way... if the adoption is going to be by an adult that's already been in the child's life for a long time (e.g. a grandparent, aunt/uncle) and they're offering a more stable home than the father can, or if the child knows them well but the father is "estranged", then the courts might well grant custody to the "known" family member in the best interests of the child. The father would still have access rights, though, and could potentially apply for custody in future if there's good reason.

If i was him and got custody i'd be applying for maintenance from the mother.

Thetruth is going to love you :laugh:

Asking for advice on a big brother forum is prob not the best, a site like this may be better..
http://www.separateddads.co.uk/your-...-children.html

it would all depend on whether the father could afford to look after the baby/whether he had been trouble with the police/whether he had the support etc

I would think unless there was a very good reason for it not to happen, that if the mother didnt want the child the father would get...first refusal for want of better words (I know that sounds awful). Also if I am not mistaken, both parents have to agree for the child to be put up for adoption in the first place?

cheers, ive found this is big brother site highly beneficial on a multitude of topics

In a fair world the father should be the first choice in that situation.He is the next of kin.A father can look after a kid just as well as a mother if not better in some cases.I would think the father would be asked first to be honest.If not then the system is f'cked up.

Over here, even if the fathers name is on the birth cert, the father is not the childs legal Guardian until the mother either consents or if she doesn't he'd have to take her to court (unless they were married and then the father is automatically legal guardian)

Me too and it's fine for general advice, but for specific advice on family law then maybe not though.