- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Complex bill would make it harder to challenge a father's paternity rights in Louisiana
Posted on 3/19/18 at 10:04 am
Posted on 3/19/18 at 10:04 am
2nd Paternity thread of the day on the OT. Short summary: man and women in long-term relationship, decide to have child, man can't have children but they jointly find donor, woman has child, man listed as father on birth certificate, the sign paternity affidavit, child named after man's family. 6 months later they break up, woman leaves man, takes child, ask courts to strip man's paternity rights. She claims abuse, man denies, now he can't see his son.
Problem is paternity laws that actually protect men against coercion and women lying about paternity actually work against him in this case. Now trying to change the law to make
What says the OT? I see arguments on both sides, but I definitely feel for the man here.
https://www.theadvocate.com/new_orleans/news/article_5c9dbcfa-294f-11e8-b3a1-dfd0e35cacb9.html
Problem is paternity laws that actually protect men against coercion and women lying about paternity actually work against him in this case. Now trying to change the law to make
What says the OT? I see arguments on both sides, but I definitely feel for the man here.
quote:
Hightower broke up with his girlfriend of at least six years in January 2017 and has been trying ever since to maintain a relationship with the son she gave birth to in October 2016. The child was conceived via a sperm donor and in vitro fertilization. Hightower is infertile; the former couple selected the donor together and had intended to raise him together, according to court documents.
Thus, Hightower was listed as the father on the child’s birth certificate, and the child shares Hightower’s middle name and surname. But not long after he and the woman broke up, she sued to strip Hightower’s paternity. Hightower struck back; the case is now before the courts.
https://www.theadvocate.com/new_orleans/news/article_5c9dbcfa-294f-11e8-b3a1-dfd0e35cacb9.html
9
Posted on 3/19/18 at 10:05 am to NOLALGD
quote:
Hightower
I always wondered what happened to him after he left the force.
Posted on 3/19/18 at 10:06 am to NOLALGD
quote:
man listed as father on birth certificate
How do they treat this if it's a deadbeat father? Can't have it both ways. If it's on the birth certificate, he's the father.
Posted on 3/19/18 at 10:07 am to NOLALGD
quote:
Hightower is infertile; the former couple selected the donor together and had intended to raise him together, according to court documents.
Man, I just can't understand why you would make such a huge decision with someone you are just dating.
Posted on 3/19/18 at 10:09 am to NOLALGD
Family courts are totally slanted against men. This is just another way.
Funny thing though, I'm fairly certain there is prescedent that she can now see the donor for child support. Didn't a lesbian couple do that successfully last year?
Funny thing though, I'm fairly certain there is prescedent that she can now see the donor for child support. Didn't a lesbian couple do that successfully last year?
Posted on 3/19/18 at 10:13 am to NOLALGD
quote:
What says the OT?
I think the man should get split custody...but after reading the article and seeing this about how the law reads, he's gonna have a tough time in court I think
quote:
In Louisiana, a married man is presumed to be the father of any child his wife conceives during the marriage and can’t disavow a child born to his wife as a result of an in vitro fertilization or artificial insemination to which he consented.
But if an unmarried man acknowledges a child as his, his acknowledgment can later be voided if he is not that child’s father or if there is some mistake on the form, among other reasons.
Chalk this up as another reason why you shouldn't intentionally plan to have a child with someone until you marry them first.
Posted on 3/19/18 at 10:14 am to Areddishfish
quote:
Man, I just can't understand why you would make such a huge decision with someone you are just dating.
I agree but its also different times these days, plus they were together for a significant amount of time. Its also not like it was arbitrary, I looked at his site and he said they purposely selected a donor that looked like him and his child pictures.
Posted on 3/19/18 at 10:33 am to NOLALGD
This is a case of "bad facts making bad law." This is a rare and unusual situation.
Posted on 3/19/18 at 11:00 am to NOLALGD
Did you read the bill? It is not complex and actually makes the law about revoking acknowledgement in cases of surrogacy the same as revoking acknowledgement in every other case.
Basically, the current law states that after a certain time period you need clear and convincing evidence that there was fraud, duress, material mistake of fact, error or that the man who executed the authentic act (i.e. signed the birth certificate or signed an act of acknowledgment) is not the biological father...
All this bill does is give those same standards for assisted conception, minus the clear and convincing evidence that he is not the father. So she can't argue oh he isn't the father so he gets no rights, as you can in non surrogacy cases. Its not complex and idk why the advocate portrayed it as such.
LINK to the BILL
Basically, the current law states that after a certain time period you need clear and convincing evidence that there was fraud, duress, material mistake of fact, error or that the man who executed the authentic act (i.e. signed the birth certificate or signed an act of acknowledgment) is not the biological father...
All this bill does is give those same standards for assisted conception, minus the clear and convincing evidence that he is not the father. So she can't argue oh he isn't the father so he gets no rights, as you can in non surrogacy cases. Its not complex and idk why the advocate portrayed it as such.
LINK to the BILL
This post was edited on 3/19/18 at 11:11 am
Posted on 3/19/18 at 11:09 am to NOLALGD
He sure as hell wouldn't be removed if it was about Child Support. Insane how rigged family courts are against guys.
Posted on 3/19/18 at 11:26 am to BRbornandraised
quote:
All this bill does is give those same standards for assisted conception, minus the clear and convincing evidence that he is not the father. So she can't argue oh he isn't the father so he gets no rights, as you can in non surrogacy cases. Its not complex and idk why the advocate portrayed it as such.
This makes alot of sense to me.
Posted on 3/19/18 at 11:30 am to NOLALGD
I’ve said this a thousands times, but it should be a law in the state of Louisiana that a paternity is mandatory before the father’s name can listed on a birth certificate.
The only way that provision could be waived is if a legal adaptation had taken place
The only way that provision could be waived is if a legal adaptation had taken place
Posted on 3/19/18 at 11:44 am to NOLALGD
Yeah, it sucks that this bill will be too little too late for the guy in the story. Unless they amend the bill and specifically provide that it will apply retroactively, it will not affect his case.
Posted on 3/19/18 at 12:23 pm to TH03
quote:
How do they treat this if it's a deadbeat father? Can't have it both ways. If it's on the birth certificate, he's the father.
Not if all the necessary witnesses did not sign.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News