If it’s mutually consentual, then why does the state have to ‘allow’ anything? If you don’t want any money from the father, and the father doesn’t want to have anything to do with the child, then just go on. He’s still the child’s father. The only reason I would see that it would need to be addressed legally is if you got remarried and your spouse wanted to adopt your child. THEN the dad’s rights would have to be terminated. Other than that, I would think an agreement drawn up by you and the Dad (signed and notarized) would suffice with the child support and visitation issues.
I would agree. If the father does not want anything to do with the child(ren) I would think an agreement could take care of the details for any future events. I believe that the the courts have to be involved and consent even if the parents mutually agree.
Terminating a parent’s rights is not something that is done lightly and unless there is someone wishing to adopt, I would think it would be less time, money and stress to get an agreement drawn up between you and settle the matter that way. There are a lot of parents out there who have had nothing to do with their children. Their rights are not terminated because it’s just simply not necessary. One parent assumes all finacial and emotional responsibility and the other parent simply “disappears” from their lives…
As comingclean2 stated and I have stated in the past, biologically, the fact that he is that child’s father is not something that can change regardless. Even children that are adopted, which is essentially terminating your parental rights, tend to search for their biological (birth) parents later in life…my thinking is that even if you have the father’s rights terminated, this is still a possibility. It would just seem easier to have a notarized agreement so that it does not come back on you later instead of going to court.
For me the big concern is later regret on his part and deciding to come into my child’s life and disrupting it and me left with no legal recourse. He is a good man, I have no doubt about that. We both agree that we are both good, competant people. However he just does not feel that he can ‘deal’ with explaining to people about the baby (he & I are both separated from other spouses and he has a somewhat traditional family). Personally I think that it is a bunch of crap, I feel like you should be responsible for your actions and the creating of a child is definitely an action. But I also am not going to force the issue and have him resent the child, I would rather do this on my own. Good man or not, sometimes people in general can’t handle but so much of life.
At this time, I am drawing up a document for he and I to sign infront of a notary. I know that it isn’t really legal by state laws (from what I understand so far), but at least it is something to show that this is what was agreed to incase either of us changed our minds. It does have a statement in it that clearly states that when the time comes that the child(ren) ask about and want to establish contact that I will assist her in that action. I just want there to be no chance of confusion when we finally walk away from one another. I want to keep this as peaceful as possible.
That sounds like the best solution. If you both sign it and it is notarized, it is legal and would stand up in court.
Unfortunately, if he does decide later on that he’s made a mistake in not being involved, he could come back regardless of whether or not you have removed his parental rights…
Stepmother, I am wondering if I am understanding you completely. I do realize that in our backwards state that the courts have to intervene in almost everything, so if he was to argue the termination later that it wouldn’t truly be valid. But if a judge was to terminate them once the baby(ies) are born, could he stil come back later to have that overturned? I am not at all opposed to him being a part of the child(ren)'s life (lives) but I feel strongly that for the stability of the rest of my children (and even his) that if he is going to be involved, that he needs to own up and be involved from the beginning. I sadly acknowledge that he and I are not going to be together, but in all honesty if he ends up being the kind to walk away and terminate his rights willingly, then he is NOT the man I thought that he was and I don’t want him in the picture at all (BTDT).
I’m not suggesting that he could have it overturned, what I’m saying is that even with his rights terminated, his child could one day want to meet him. He could come back when the child is 16 and want to be involved and the child wants him involved. Legally, he would no longer have any rights to the child or any finacial responsibility but that will not make a difference if both the child and the father want a relationship. You can get a restraining order against him but then what happens when the child that you raised is angry at you for keeping their father away from them?
Children that are adopted often seek out their biological parents and I feel that the same would be true if you terminate a parent’s rights. It will not change the fact that that person is that child’s biological parent. Eventually, that child is going to be old enough to determine if they want to attempt a relationship with their biological parent. If you have ever tried before you know that the best way to get a teenager to do something is to tell them that they can’t.
If you have an agreement between you then yes, you have a legal action to take should he come back and try to disrupt your lives. Having his parental rights terminated also would give you legal action to take should this happen.
What if he comes back with intentions of just having a relationship with the child? No disruption, no drama, no expectations. Having an agreement would be easier than terminating rights because you will have the same course of action later but without the expense. Again, this is just my opinion and I could be looking at the situation wrong, but if you both agree to this I don’t see the need to spend all the extra time and money on court for the same result. Maybe for me that just sounds too final.
If both parents agree that the father will terminate all of his rights to the child(ren) and the mother chooses to waive all rights to financial support for the child(ren) is this something that the state of NC will allow? From what I am reading the state will only allow it if there is another parent (father/mother whichever the case may be) that is willing to take that responsibility. Or if the parent who is wanting to waive their rights is proven to be basically a horrible person for one reason or another (abandonment and such). Am I understanding this correctly? I am just not sure why the state should have any say if both parents agree to this and feel that it would be in the best interest of the child.