One 'Small Step' Too Far?

Many unmarried mothers and fathers still stare at me in disbelief when I inform them that an unmarried father does not automatically acquire the rights and responsibilities of a parent unless his partner or the court agrees that he should, or he is named on the birth certificate in respect of children born after 1 December 2003. Quite understandably, the prospect of raising the issue with their now ex-partner or engaging in lengthy and expensive proceedings is particularly daunting.

However, help may well be on its way as a result of government proposals that unmarried parents register the birth of their children jointly, as married couples do.

At present, up to 45,000 birth registrations do not include the name of the father, even though a large proportion of those fathers are in regular contact with their children. Very few people will argue that a child does not have the right to know who his or her parents are and the government are hoping that by requiring unmarried parents to jointly register the birth of their children then it will encourage both of them to accept and share their responsibilities as well as their rights.

The Government suggests that the changes will give mothers a right to insist that the father acknowledges his responsibilities to his child whilst, on the other hand, giving the father a right to insist that he is registered on the birth certificate thereby removing what may be an unnecessary obstacle in the way of those fathers who want to take responsibility for their children. Basically the proposals would bring the rights of unmarried fathers more into line with those of unmarried mothers.

It is proposed that where a mother is unable to identify or trace the father or feels that she and her family would be put at risk if he were to be identified on the birth certificate, in circumstances such as domestic abuse, she would still be able to register the birth of the child on her own without the father. This would also apply in circumstances where it would be impracticable to register jointly, for example, the father is working away and cannot register the birth in time.

It is further proposed to make the process of registering the birth more easily accessible by enabling parents to do so at other venues apart from the hospital or the registrar’s office. If the father is unable to attend to register the birth in person then there could also be more simplified forms that the father can sign to accept paternity which can be submitted in his absence. Those forms may be widely available from such places as nurseries, GP surgeries, Surestart children centres or other local community venues.

A little known fact is that, at present, mothers who have registered the birth on their own can always re-register to include the father’s details, with his consent.

Some mothers may wish to record the identity of the father on the birth certificate against the wishes of the father or in circumstances where his wishes are not known. If so, the registrar will contact the father and if paternity is denied then he will have to undergo a paternity test and his name will only be recorded if he is in fact the father.

On the other hand, if a father wants to declare his paternity and the mother is refusing to do so, she will have the right to refuse to co-operate in a paternity test, leaving the father to apply to the court for a declaration of paternity.

Although we would all support steps to promote the welfare of children and a joint parenting approach, we will just have to wait and see whether these proposals are going to assist and, particularly, protect a small minority of vulnerable mothers and children. For the majority, these proposals may well seem like they have been a long time coming. For that vulnerable minority it may well be a step too far. 

Published 23/06/2008. The author of this article is Julia Lilley