I don’t know American law, but depending on if the child has lived with both parents I think there are rights as well as reposnibilities..

Get it in writing, do not pass go do not collect $200, do it right now!

Lawyer consultation is free, so they can talk to a lawyer today and get it going.

Taking the child across state lines without permission can be considered kidnapping though, I would no one would not go that far? But let her know that she doesn't have permission. That's the key!

Here is the concern: the mother has no ties to CA other than the current relationship. Father is established in CA, all his family is in CA., he's not going anywhere. If the mother decides to leave the relationship, she has out of state ties/family where she possibly would/could go.

That is my thought too Rob333, she needs to know she just can't up and leave with the child once it's born. Now before the child born...that's another story. YIKES!!

Unless paternity is established (in most states a marriage establishes paternity - if you’re not married, you need a court filing. In my state that is done in a Paternity action. The process may vary depending on whether the father is on the birth certificate or not.) They need court orders; an agreement written up by them will do nothing-if she leaves. Neither the police or court is going to do anything without court orders. And even WITH court orders it’s difficult to get anyone to do anything across state lines unless the child is in danger. It can be very expensive to find legal recourse if she leaves. It also depends on how long the child has lived in the current state.

I'm curious if marital status is a factor. Can't imagine why it would be.

My answers above assumed she was leaving the state. If she’s just leaving the home with the child to move into a different home, they can agree to anything as far as him having time with the child, but if she renigs, he will need court orders to be able to enforce his rights. And in most states marital status does make a difference. Mostly the difference is in the process he must use to establish his rights.

Marriage has nothing to do with paternity and has no bearing on custody. If paternity is legally determined than the lawyers will fight out custody in court. In my state one parent cannot move a child out of the town they reside in w/o the other parents permission. No court can change that. If paternity has not been established that is where you begin. And thank you for pointing out that the idea that this BABY is only the woman's, and no one else has a say so it INSANITY!! Please list ALL THE PEOPLE who will be DEVASTATED if she makes a choice no one can LIVE with!!

See a lawyer who works with what's called family law. Rules will vary with circumstances and state location.

Most disputes between individuals do not result in court appearances and indeed, reaching a resolution civilly and without dispute will be the quickest and cheapest outcome, if possible. Unless child protection laws require a court ruling, but sometimes such things are possible without appearance if parties are in agreement.

While wanting to see your children is important can the ex-partner continue to live in the state or will it be a hardship for them. California is mentioned and that is an expensive state to live in.

Other things to think about beyond you are enslaving her by the requirement to stay in any location would be if they must move to another area for her occupation you are forcing her to decline. It would take another court order which can take months for your partner to receive that permission. There are many parents that handle this for the good of the children rather than what one or the other parent wants.

I have had a very close experience with this but I do believe the rules and laws governing this may differ from state to state.

The father was named on the birth certificate so no question about paternity. And the two parties had only a brief relationship and never resided together. All custody, maintenance/financial and visitation and travel issues were spelled out in a Parenting Plan, just the same as if it was a married couple with children that are divorcing. This is in WA state. The Parenting Plan is a fully legal and enforceable 'contract' between the parents regardless of what their current or prior relationship may have been. It cannot be ignored nor changed or altered without court authorization.

This can be complex. Some states even have statutory language specifying rules for how far within the state a parent can move. Another big decision is to decide which parent will be the custodial parent, it is not always the mother. You have said that the mother has no ties to Ca. except the relationship, so she may still be a resident of another state. She may prior to the birth return to her state of residence where she may have family. Generally the court will decide who has primary custody depending on the best interests of the child. It is of course not always who is wealthiest, there are many different factors considered.

Depending on factors such as where the child is for the 6 months prior to a legal action, The Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act will specify where the action may be brought, and other rules concerning parents from different states.

"Mostly the difference is in the process he must use to establish his rights."

Right, olychick, I didn't latch onto the detail that the child hasn't been born yet. Clearly legal paternity must be established. Get on that birth certificate!

Are you expecting break-up level relationship problems for the couple? Or is this just hypothetical?

How far along is she? Untill she gives birth, she can leave if she wants. When she gives birth, she can choose to refuse to list a father on the birth certificate. If she does that, he can file to be put on after and establish paternity, it's a process.

If she wants to leave after giving birth and naming the father on the birth certificate- that's a whole different process.

Something like Gardengal mentioned is what I was thinking.

checking basic info online, I am seeing just being listed on the birth certificate is not enough. The father would need to file a form establishing paternity but supposedly that can be done at the hospital too when the baby is born.

Due date is still a few months off, but the GF has a shown a pattern of when there are issues, "she goes out of town"...

It will depend on so many things - whether they were common law, whether they lived together, whether it is proved he's the father, whether they have other children together......and on and on. If he's not her husband, or proven to be the father of the baby, she can up and leave with the infant if she chooses.

If shes not due for a few months, then all you really can do is get yourself a family lawyer and start on paperwork. Or rather, your son get himself one. He wouldn't be the first person in an iffy relationship and a pregnancy becomes involved.

How does your son feel in all of this? And the expectant mother?

" Something like Gardengal mentioned is what I was thinking. "

Unfortunately, when I Googled "parenting plan", the only reference was for here in Washington state. So it seems likely that different rules will apply in different states or locations. But it also seems likely that other jurisdictions would have some type of court order covering the same issues. Maybe under a different title?

Established paternity (or at least establishing parental rights) is a requirement for a parenting plan but the name as parent on a birth certificate suffices.

My son is going through this right now....

In *his* case, the mom walked out and left the child with him. Because of her violent tendancies, he was able to get a protection order against her (she did something a week after she left in front of a LOT of witnesses) and the police told my son to get the order of protection. The judge issued it that night and another judge let it stand as is a few days later in court.

He is the "stable" parent having only had two jobs in ten years (one was his own business) and one residence in ten years. He is also the parent who is able to take the child to school and has someone pick the child up three days a week, while she has to find someone the other two (agreed to visitations dates). She pays the child support and he gets that plus the monthly child tax credit.

This is still temporary and they're still "fighting" over custody but as it stands right now, the judge said she has to have one job and one residence for at least 12 months before he'll even consider letting my grandson live with her 50/50. She doesn't drive and has no way to get him to school in the mornings and no way to pick him up in the afternoon so she could be SOL... ;)

While I am paying for the attorney, I don't ask questions so I don't really know much else.

ETA: get something in writing!!! Is his name on the birth certificate? If so, then dna doesn't matter in a court of law. My nephew is not the bio father of his oldest daughter, but he made sure to put his name on her birth certificate and he pays child support for her along with his other children. If his name isn't on the birth certificate, the mother can possibly keep the child away from him but I think he would have to pay for the dna test to prove parentage. It's best to use a lawyer. I'm a firm believer in cover your @$$. Had my son known he could have been a single father nine years ago, he would have done this so much sooner. He thought she had all the rights because they are not married and she is the childs mother. Turns out, every time she walked out and never took their child, he didn't have to let her move back in and he never had to hand the child back over to her............ And I wouldn't have the amount of grey hair I have today.

Just be aware that along with paternity and custody are issues of child care costs.

i worked in family law for years. i can only speak for illinois but in the case of an unmarried couple, unless and until paternity is established via a court order (often involving DNA testing), the man has zero say in anything. if he wants to be a part of the child's life, he files a petition to establish paternity. once he is determined to be the biological father, the parties will negotiate, through their attorneys, a schedule for visitation and child support. once they reach an agreement, an order of paternity is entered by the court.

if paternity isn't established via a court order, the woman has every right to move wherever she wants to including clear across the country and cannot be stopped. this includes before AND after the child is born.

Whoever this couple is (is the young man your son?), they've learned the usefulness of the old adage "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". Though, unfortunately, the hard way, which is sad and unfortunate for all concerned. Especially for the child, an innocent victim.

I don't think we here know that the child will be a victim. We don't know what the couple's thoughts, feelings, questions, hopes, or intentions are. Always1stepbehind has some insight, but we outsiders cannot always be sure what goes on in a couple's life together.

Does the father actually want the child to be near him or is it other members of his family wanting access to the baby when born. Often in situations like this it is not the parents who are pressing for things like this.

I suppose there are some states where this isn't true (tho I'm not aware of any, but there is some really backwards stuff happening these days) but there actually has to be a baby before anything can be filed, Paternity, parenting plan, etc. So after the baby's birth is the only time the court will become involved, unless there might be harm being caused to the fetus. This has some general info: https://www.findlaw.com/family/paternity/fathers-rights-before-birth.html

has to be a baby before anything can be filed

the reason for this is because paternity cannot be established until after the baby is born, usually via DNA testing.

talk about some really backwards stuff...i remember one particular case where a married couple had a child. when the child was a year or two old, mom came clean and told dad that the baby was the result of an affair she had and that he was not the bio dad. DNA testing was done that ultimately proved that fact. "dad" filed for divorce and was ultimately ordered to pay child support not only on the children they had together but also on the child that was not even his. mom even ended up eventually marrying the other guy!!

I wondered if it was the reverse would the male be required to remain in the proximity of the woman. While I know that would not happen it also shows how second class or lower women are.

If leaving is what she has done in the past with the attitude that she must remain in the state I have to wonder if there is abuse of some type happening. People who are abused often return to their abuser. Most frequently few around them even the abused recognize what is happening behind closed doors is happening or that it is abuse especially immediate family.

First off, it is not my son. The concern is once the baby is born and if things don't work out what prevents the mom from leaving with the baby. What are the fathers right since they are not married. I would think they would have to have some type of custody agreement just like a divorced couple. But the other concern is if something happened before the baby was born and they split up, she would probably leave to another state.

Yes, until there are court orders she’s likely free to travel with the baby once it’s born. Before she gives birth, she is free to travel anywhere and if she gives birth in another state then that state will have jurisdiction over the baby. So court filings would have to be done there. if she’s smart and doesn’t see this as a forever relationship, and wants the help and support if her family, then she’d relocate before the birth.

We actually have three of these situations in our family. In one of them, the mother and father were living together in a house that they bought together. In breaking up, they had to get lawyers, since there were a lot of financial ends to decide. They have a 50/50 custody agreement, but I don't think that the question of moving to another state will occur, since they are both teachers in the county that they live. Their situation is "almost" amicable. In the second, the former couple has a custody agreement, but they seem to be in court all the time for financial reasons. They have 50/50 custody, but the mom wants the father to cover completely the cost of private school and other activities. In the third situation, it is really sad. The mom worked days; the father nights, and he was the primary caregiver. She left with the child and went to live with her very rich parents, who lawyered her up. He hasn't the same resources and is at her mercy. She might be the one who moves. He wanted to take the child to visit his parents at Christmas, (out of state) and couldn't. The grandparents are worried that they may never see the child again. Any breakup, married or not, is horrid when children are in the picture.

Sidebar: Pregnant women can be easy prey for the adoption industry. They can be 'rescued from a problem' by being spirited off and kept isolated until the baby is born. The mother is coerced to: a) provide no name for the father, and b) sign a surrender of rights to the baby. People pay huge fees for a healthy baby. This isn't just 'history'.

Well, what the heck. Maybe the woman will prefer to give full custody to the father and move somewhere else...or not. Maybe the father will take the baby and run away to another state....or not. Usually when I get a missing child alert on my cell phone, it is a father who has run with his child.

" What are the fathers right since they are not married. "

If they can prove they are the father, they do have significant rights, including the right to a fair custodial arrangement, and responsibilities. If they are married, there is the presumption of fatherhood and no other proof is needed; since they're not married, all he has to do is prove he's the father......That seems perfectly reasonable to me. Paternity can be tested before or after birth.

I don't think anyone can force a woman to test for paternity before a baby is born (if that's even possible). And there is no reason to do it because you cannot file a parenting plan until there is a baby.

" (if that's even possible). "

It is possible (I wondered, so I looked it up). You're right that a possible father (or grandparent) can't force a woman to test (or have her child tested) for paternity, but the courts can.

I have not read all the responses but my first instinct was to advise that the alleged father get a DNA test to make sure that he will not be fighting for and especially not paying child support for a kid that is not even his. If it is his, and after that is officially established in court both parents have rights that the other parent can be punished for trying to withhold.

TV, what you say is true to a point but, at least in this state, a family case is opened and goes through the court system before anything is set in stone.

either party can file a family case (he, to establish his paternity and therefore gain his rights/she to establish paternity which will enable her to get child support). when paternity is established, any court order will include the issue of custody.

in some states, it's always 50/50, in others (like illinois), full residential custody can be granted to either party, depending on circumstances. custody arrangements include weekends/weekdays/major holidays and oftentimes, especially when the parties aren't amicable, even the hours of visitation as well as where the "exchange" of the child will take place (sometimes a fast food parking lot, sometimes the sherrif's office, etc. etc.).

i have a nephew going through a divorce. his wife has 2 boys from a previous relationship (7 and 9 years of age). they have a 3 year old daughter together. it was recently discovered that mom was leaving the little girl with her 2 brothers while she ran errands, had lunch with friends, went out on dates. i told him to make sure his attorney includes a clause in the custody arrangement that forbids her leaving the daughter with anyone other than a responsible adult and to be more specific, either set of grandparents or a trusted babysitter.

This whole thing reminds me of when women were property.

TV, I don't think a court would (or it shouldn't) force a women to test a fetus re: paternity, when a test can be done once there is a baby. It would be futile to test in utero because no court case regarding a child can be filed until there is a child. But, I will admit, the way things are going regarding women and their bodily/health integrity, nothing would surprise me anymore.

" TV, I don't think a court would (or it shouldn't) force a women to test a fetus re: paternity, when a test can be done once there is a baby. "

Probably true, but from what I've read, it is sometimes possible to determine paternity with a blood sample from mother and (potential) father - depending on the stage of the pregnancy. It is no longer required to do an amniocentesis for the fetal DNA.

Laws do vary by state so this may have no bearing on the situation you are speaking about. NJ is very strict in these cases and the child's welfare takes priority. Whether they are married or not it is very important that the father is named on the birth certificate. My nephew is living with a woman who has a 3 year old from a previous relationship. The father is on the birth certificate but they split up a few months after the birth. They never married and she has primary custody but the court sanctioned agreement states that both parents must live within 30 minutes of each other. They alternate weekends, holidays are evenly divided, and he has his son Tues afternoon until Wed evening. This is difficult for my nephew because it is causing problems with his employment.

Paternity can be established before childbirth. There is a non-invasive procedure that is about 99% accurate. Fetal DNA is present in the mother's bloodstream and testing can be done after 7 or 8 weeks. A blood sample is taken from the mother and a check swab for the 'father'. The lab then creates a genetic profile of the fetus and then compares it with the father.

https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diagnostics/10119-dna-paternity-test

If the mother is interested in testing for paternity before the birth, maybe she could do it if it's available, as you note. I do not think a court would order her to do that, because what would be the point? Nothing regarding custody or visitation regarding a child can be determined until there is a child. In this Orwellian world, it wouldn't surprise me to learn that women could be forced to do it, if a man wants it done.

HAHAHHA there is a child already. It just has no legal rights at this time. This thread pretty much is all about SAID CHILD. To ignore the biology is just silly and playing word games that do not change the truth that this woman is having a baby that was jointly created so of course they ought to have joint say so on it's future. Doing back flips to ignore truth really servers no one. Given the nature of the world and relationships seems logical that paternity testing would be part of most pregnancies. How fabulous it can be done w/o danger to baby. After all once baby has rights ( is born) daddy will be forced to be financially responsible for the child until it is 18. It behooves everyone daddy and State to know for sure who the father is.

Fetus/Baby/Child label doesn't matter it's obvious what it is!!

Right, but I wonder if it might be important for financial support for the mother for pre-natal care. Maybe?

Nope, not really a thing in the states. Mother is on her own and can apply for aid or if she has medical coverage she can get prenatal care, or she can pay out of pocket for prenatal care. If she is paying out of pocket, she might be lucky and close to a Planned Parenthood where she can recieve low cost or potentially free prenatal care. The father isn't on the hook for support for prenatal care. If he wants to, he could relinquish parental rights before birth. After birth, BC, and potentially paternity test is when he becomes responsible for financial support. Some folks on the hill have presented language to get some laws or reforms on the books for child support during pregnancy, but it's still being kicked around and not really active on dockets yet.

If he wants to, he could relinquish parental rights before birth.

just curious, how would this be done w/o a court action?

@always1stepbehind why did you post this family law question on a home design site?

@spammie, this is an off topic conversation site for things not having to do with decor.