Different rights for fathers in adoption?

The laws that apply to paternity were written by men to protect men from having to pay for an other man's child. Unless a man and woman are married, the father has no responsibility to the mother so subsequently he has no rights, either. With rights come responsibility. He is not legally a parent unless he acknowledges paternity. In Texas, few do that. With DNA he can be forced to after the child is born, but that is recent.

There is a misconception about the Putative Father's Registry. They have little value, since many men are unaware that they exist, information is difficult to obtain about them, and there is a lot of confusion about how they work, and delay can mean that they are not eligible, a fact that is not missed by the agencies and adoption attorneys. The laws are different from state to state, but the agencies had their hands in the writing of the laws regarding paternity and the putative fathers registries and they are not father friendly. The agencies do NOT want anything to interfere with their ability to get a baby for eager paps and fathers are considered a nuisance and a necessary evil and are often regarded with contempt.

However, if today's fathers are concerned about their rights as parents, why are they not lining up to change the laws? Most of them seem more concerned about NOT being the fathers of the children or insuring that there was distance between themselves and the possible outcome of their alliances rather than signing Acknowledgments of Paternity. In the county where I was a County Clerk, we got kudos for getting a father to sign an Acknowledgment of Paternity because it was so uncommon for unmarried fathers to do so.

I am sure that father's rights are being trampled as are women's rights. And, as a citizen I am concerned about anyone's rights being trampled. However, until I see them complaining I can only assume that they don't really care. They have, historically, been more concerned with not having to pay child support than steppping up to claim offspring, so they really can't blame anyone but other men.

Women shouldn't have to fight for men's rights, too, especially if they are not fighting for themselves. Even this question was posed by a woman. Interesting!

Men don't have the same rights as the mother this was proved in a court in Texas. My son didn't even have the right to go to the hospital or even now what hospital the mother was at. He never got to see his son at birth and the adoption agency and couple took him out of the hospital 2 days after birth and hid him for over 16 months until finally the courts ordered dna when the child was 16 months old did he find him. Even at that point the adoption agency told the couple not to take the child for DNA but let one of their social workers do it to furter hid the child. The birth mother finally gave my son his first pictures of the baby at 8 months old. He has gone through hell over this. This baby was not taken to give the child a good home he was taken to give a couple a new born child.   It took over a year to get this in court the first time and 1 year toget the final orders now he's waiting since april for the appeal court to make their ruling. The courts didn't find my son unfit. They tried to say that he knew about the child which was a lie. She was living with another man and his mother had told him the baby was this other man. My son was smart enought to tape it. She got on the stand and lied but when they pulled out the tape she had to tell the truth.. Now after all this the birth mother had never told the father the child was his and that was in violations but after this father's case Texas changed the laws where now a father doesn't have the right to know if his child is going to be put up for adoption. No wonder the adoption agencies run things down here in Texas. And when my son finally get's the right to raise his child he will be mostly likly around 4 years old and a bunch of people are going to say look at the damage this is doing to the child they won't know that since the child was 3 he has spent summmer down in Texas with his dad and sister or that he see his dad once a month. They are going to feel sorry for these kidnappers. When a child comes missing out of a hospital then everyone feels for the mother children are being taken from their father's every day and they call him a dead beat dad or worse.

All father's need to be told and giving the same rights as the mothers but as long as the adoption agencies fund the governor and senators and ect then they are going to follow what the adoption agencies want

He would have to hire an attorney immediately. I know 3 cases of this happening personally, including my late Uncle. In all 3 cases, the Dads were never notified of the pregnancy and had the adoptions overturned. In 2 cases, the baby was over a year old. Two of those children are now college-aged and my late Uncle's daughter is now 2 (being raised by his son, my cousin). It shouldn't EVER be this way. Unless a prostitute, the women nearly always know who the father is. However, unless you have a good job and can afford the lawyer, it's really tough to get an adoption overturned once it is final. It's up to other dads who have had their rights trampled on to get a case to the Supreme Court to have putative father's registries banned as the unconstitutional practice they are.

It is my understanding that fathers can also relinquish their rights not just for adoption, but also to relinquish any claim and financial responsibility for the child. This can be done before birth.

It does appear discriminatory, but we have to remember fathers role previously that they were rarely involved at all. There may be times where women are "choosing" adoption in part because the male will have nothing to do with the pregnancy and will not support it.

But should fathers be given the same rights? Yes and no. If I was pregnant, and let's say the father was an alcoholic or something like that who I had a one night stand with. I would likely not want him to hold the child etc. But that is just me....I guess I would say that I chose to have the pregnancy so maybe I get the choices once the child is born? Doesn't make sense I guess, but not applicable to me anyway.

This is completely wrong in every way. Fathers don't know how they feel until the child is born and should be allowed to the chance to get to know their child once he/she is born. I am completely against relinquishing pre birth because it takes away the right for a parent to change their mind after the baby is born. Men bond in a different way to women to their children and don't get a chance to before birth.

It should be made illegal for a father to relinquish before his child is born and I believe it should be law that nothing is signed until the baby is 6 months old.

I conceived a child with a drug dealer. I still told him, gave him choices, and signed the papers together with him. He is a wonderful man now. It was the thing to be at the time.

I'm really tired of hearing how men are not good enough in a woman's eyes to be a parent. You had no problem creating a child with them. If they were such scum, why were you sleeping with them and taking the chance of getting pregnant by them? Besides I have seen the biggest burliest macho manly guys turn into pussy cats after becoming a father. I think it stinks what happens to men at the hands of women who think they are all knowing all of a sudden.

I think it should not only be changed I think it should be enforced with a vengeance. I support FATHERS RIGHTS.

Men have the options to remain or not to remain in a child's life. Their survival instincts, including emotions, are bred into them to create, love, and protect, however, it isn't nearly as strong as the mother's instinct, to nurture, provide, protect, heart, body, and soul.

Hormones play a lot into the emotional response that women have, and men just don't go through that hormonal time involved with the birthing process nearly like a woman.

Because men can just leave at any time during h pregnancy, laws have had to be put into place, called the putative father registry, to protect a woman's right to place the child. Laws exist where mothers can place a child before birth, and decide where that child will live, however, there are also laws that within a certain amount of time, varying from hours to months, that either of the couple that conceived a child has to revoke that relinquishmen. I think that like our state, a ten day period after the baby's birth is sufficient to change their mine.

One thing that is legal in all states is that a couple can place a guardianship over the child for a set amount of time, however at that end of time, they'd then have to either parent, or raise the child. For instance, a six month placement into a home, without the consent to adopt, but protecting the financial assets of the prospective parents to be able to claim that child legally as a dependent, and to be able to legally sign for medical treatments, surgeries, etc, is possibe. By placing a guardianship, it is stating that the first parents in no way have given up their rights to a child, to make sure that the emotional period of time has passed for them to be able to change their mind.

As an AP, I would definately look at accepting a guardianship with the possibility of adopting a child, but at the same time, when I adopted my son, the 10 day grace period that both the parents had to change their mine was the longest 10 days in my life. It was as if at the end of that 10 days, that I grabbed my son, cried for his first parent's grief, and at the same time, a totally encompassing love took place. I'd set myself up emotionally to realize that until that time, they could change their mind. On their subsequent pregnancy, they did change their mind 3 days after the birth. In a way, I was horrificly sad, as if I'd had little "C" ripped from me, but at the same time, I was proud of them for stepping up, changing their lives for the better to be parents. I wish they'd stick with that plan.