advertisement
Question
Posted by: Trying Dad | 2010/01/19

Unmarried father rights

I am an unmarried father, mother is not contesting my rights as per new Act, but refuses to allow me to exercise rights even though she has signed a parenting plan detailing how we are to exercise those rights. Says I have no rights unless the plan is made an order of the court.

So whats the point of a plan that she has signed if she refuses to acknowledge the plan? In order to legally deny me rights would she have to obtain a court order specifically stating I cannot exercise rights, and until such time can I exercise my rights by default as per section 42?

Not what you were looking for? Try searching again, or ask your own question
Our expert says:
Expert ImageFamily law expert

Hi Trying Dad,

My sympathy is with you. In terms of section 1 of the Children’s Act 38 of 2005 the right of contact, also known as “access”, is defined in section 1(1) of the Act and means:

i. maintaining a personal relationship with the child; and

ii. if the child lives with someone else –

a. communication on a regular basis with the child in person including visiting the child or being visited by the child; or

b. communicating on a regular basis with the child in any other manner including through the post or by telephone or any other form of electronic communication.

Section 18 of the Act provides that a person may have either full or specific parental rights and responsibilities in respect of a child. Furthermore, that the parental rights and responsibilities a person may have in respect of the child include the responsibility and the right to maintain contact with the child.

In terms of section 21 an unmarried father has full parental rights and responsibilities in respect of a child born out of wedlock if -

i. at the time of the child’s birth he is living with the mother in a permanent life-partnership; or

ii. he, regardless of whether he has lived or is living with the mother,

a. consents to be identified or successfully applies in terms of section 26 to be identified as the child’s father or pays damages in terms of customary law;

b. contributes or has attempted in good faith to contribute to the child’s upbringing for a reasonable period; and

c. contributes or has attempted to contribute in good faith to contribute towards expenses in connection with the maintenance to the child for a reasonable period.

In essence section 21 basically means that an unmarried father has the right of contact to his child if the conditions I mentioned above are met.

If the mother and unmarried father dispute whether or not the above criterion has been fulfilled, the matter has to be referred for mediation to a family advocate, social worker, social service professional or other suitably qualified person. If either the mother or the unmarried father are dissatisfied with the outcome of the mediation, it can be referred to court for review.

If the unmarried father does not have a right of contact in terms of section 21 or in terms of a court order, he may still be able to acquire a right of contact in terms of an agreement with the mother. The agreement must be in the prescribed format and contain the prescribed particulars. Also, the agreement must be registered with the family advocate or made an order of the High Court or the children's court on application by a party to the agreement.

Any Magistrate’s court is a children’s court and will have jurisdiction to hear the matter if the child involved is ordinarily a resident within the area of the court.

The family advocate or court will have to be satisfied that the agreement is in the best interests of the child. This requirement is in line with the Constitution. When giving effect to the best interests of the child ], a court will consider:

• the nature of the relationship between the child and the parent;
• the attitude of the parent towards the child and
• towards the exercise of parental responsibilities and rights in respect of the child;
• the capacity of the parent to provide for the needs of the child;
• the likely effect on the child of any separation from either parent; and
• the need of a child to maintain a connection with his or her family.

The agreement will be of no force and effect if it is not duly registered with the family advocate or made an order of the High court or children’s court.

If I was in your shoes, I will definately enforce my rights, it is absolutely unacceptable that you as the natural father is denied the right to be part of your child's life. I agree with G-Dad, you will have to approach court to enforce your rights.

The information provided does not constitute a diagnosis of your condition. You should consult a medical practitioner or other appropriate health care professional for a physical exmanication, diagnosis and formal advice. Health24 and the expert accept no responsibility or liability for any damage or personal harm you may suffer resulting from making use of this content.

5
Our users say:
Posted by: XYZ | 2010/02/01

I take it that u have been maintaining said child ... ...

Reply to XYZ
Posted by: G-Dad | 2010/01/19

In all honesty, married fathers also have equal rights, but if the mother have the kids, she can dispute the rights, follow legal experts advise, try and get the agreement registered with the FA, that will be a cheap option if not the cheapest, local courts is another option and is free until you want to make use of legal representation, in your case there is no court order yet and an agreement that has been made a court order carry more weight than a agreement registered at the FA.

There are so many unwed fathers in the same position as you and they also red the act and also believed they have all these rights by default, I explained to them that only the courts can enforce those rights, 9 months later they realized that they should have listened to me in the first place.

It is not easy for a father to get custody, you have to proof to the courts that it is in the best interest of the child to live with the father, and some judges are not that easy to convince, I have been there, I got custody though in one terrible traumatic messy divorces possible, I never wish this on anyone, find a suitable solution if possible if not get the courts to enforce it, it will only be in the best interest of the child.

Good luck

Reply to G-Dad
Posted by: Trying Dad | 2010/01/19

This does not make sense, as the new Childrens Act clearly states that unmarried father have equal rights subject to certain conditions. These conditions are not being disputed by ex, therefore the law should apply according to new Act?

Reply to Trying Dad
Posted by: G-Dad | 2010/01/19

Legally she can not deny you any access, but yes you can only enforce your access on her if the courts made it an order, there is no thing as default rights, we would like to believe it, make it legal, get the courts to enforce it.

Hope the expert can help you on this, there are loads of fathers in the same position.

Reply to G-Dad
Posted by: Family law expert | 2010/01/19

Hi Trying Dad,

My sympathy is with you. In terms of section 1 of the Children’s Act 38 of 2005 the right of contact, also known as “access”, is defined in section 1(1) of the Act and means:

i. maintaining a personal relationship with the child; and

ii. if the child lives with someone else –

a. communication on a regular basis with the child in person including visiting the child or being visited by the child; or

b. communicating on a regular basis with the child in any other manner including through the post or by telephone or any other form of electronic communication.

Section 18 of the Act provides that a person may have either full or specific parental rights and responsibilities in respect of a child. Furthermore, that the parental rights and responsibilities a person may have in respect of the child include the responsibility and the right to maintain contact with the child.

In terms of section 21 an unmarried father has full parental rights and responsibilities in respect of a child born out of wedlock if -

i. at the time of the child’s birth he is living with the mother in a permanent life-partnership; or

ii. he, regardless of whether he has lived or is living with the mother,

a. consents to be identified or successfully applies in terms of section 26 to be identified as the child’s father or pays damages in terms of customary law;

b. contributes or has attempted in good faith to contribute to the child’s upbringing for a reasonable period; and

c. contributes or has attempted to contribute in good faith to contribute towards expenses in connection with the maintenance to the child for a reasonable period.

In essence section 21 basically means that an unmarried father has the right of contact to his child if the conditions I mentioned above are met.

If the mother and unmarried father dispute whether or not the above criterion has been fulfilled, the matter has to be referred for mediation to a family advocate, social worker, social service professional or other suitably qualified person. If either the mother or the unmarried father are dissatisfied with the outcome of the mediation, it can be referred to court for review.

If the unmarried father does not have a right of contact in terms of section 21 or in terms of a court order, he may still be able to acquire a right of contact in terms of an agreement with the mother. The agreement must be in the prescribed format and contain the prescribed particulars. Also, the agreement must be registered with the family advocate or made an order of the High Court or the children's court on application by a party to the agreement.

Any Magistrate’s court is a children’s court and will have jurisdiction to hear the matter if the child involved is ordinarily a resident within the area of the court.

The family advocate or court will have to be satisfied that the agreement is in the best interests of the child. This requirement is in line with the Constitution. When giving effect to the best interests of the child ], a court will consider:

• the nature of the relationship between the child and the parent;
• the attitude of the parent towards the child and
• towards the exercise of parental responsibilities and rights in respect of the child;
• the capacity of the parent to provide for the needs of the child;
• the likely effect on the child of any separation from either parent; and
• the need of a child to maintain a connection with his or her family.

The agreement will be of no force and effect if it is not duly registered with the family advocate or made an order of the High court or children’s court.

If I was in your shoes, I will definately enforce my rights, it is absolutely unacceptable that you as the natural father is denied the right to be part of your child's life. I agree with G-Dad, you will have to approach court to enforce your rights.

Reply to Family law expert

Have your say

Thanks for commenting! Your comment will appear on the site shortly.
Thanks for commenting! Your comment will appear on the site shortly.
advertisement