Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
I suspect this OP is one of the many who mistakenly believe that a notary's stamp and seal somehow makes the document enforceable.
Having a document notarized means one thing and one thing only - that the notary has confirmed that the signatory to the document is who s/he says s/he is. If the document is enforceable, it's enforceable whether it's notarized or not; if it's not enforceable, a notary's stamp does not make it so.
While there are occasional exceptions to this, the OP's situation is NOT one of them.
Signed,
A former notary
Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
Quote:
Quoting
cbg
I suspect this OP is one of the many who mistakenly believe that a notary's stamp and seal somehow makes the document enforceable.
Having a document notarized means one thing and one thing only - that the notary has confirmed that the signatory to the document is who s/he says s/he is. If the document is enforceable, it's enforceable whether it's notarized or not; if it's not enforceable, a notary's stamp does not make it so.
While there are occasional exceptions to this, the OP's situation is NOT one of them.
Signed,
A former notary
Ditto.
Signed,
A current notary
Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
You have no idea how glad I am that both of you stopped by this thread.
I do predict though, that the OP is going to experience one of two things:
1. The OG Effect
2. An expensive conformation of what has been said in this thread.
Or both, I suppose.
Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
Forgive me... What is the OG Effect?
Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
It's a term coined by a responder on another site, referring to the phenomena of a person getting really angry because s/he is not liking what he's hearing (particularly when it's a specific attorney whose screen-name is often shortened to OG), and then within a short amount of time (usually the same day or the next) returns to say we're all wrong, he's right, he went to court already, and his ex wife/girlfriend/boyfriend/parent/child/teacher/priest is going to spend all of their life in jail and have to pay a huge amount of money.
It's even funnier when - and this has actually happened - they go to court at 7pm on a Sunday, or even better (seriously) saying they went to court on... Superbowl Sunday, Labor Day or another public holiday.
Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
Another spectacular example of the OG effect was one poster who claimed to have filed a complaint with the EEOC, had her complaint investigated, reviewed, determined, and monetary compensation awarded - in three days time.
Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
Quote:
Quoting
cbg
Another spectacular example of the OG effect was one poster who claimed to have filed a complaint with the EEOC, had her complaint investigated, reviewed, determined, and monetary compensation awarded - in three days time.
I remember that one - or at least a perfect replica :D
Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
Hi again,
Let me sort some things out for you. I see a lot of people here throwing around well known facts pretending they are some form of insider information that makes them look smart. Someone brought up that the notice of intent to claim paternity was notarized before I even said anything about it. I never suggested that this document enforces anything, everyone knows that I am not the legal father until either she, or the court, says I am. I never refuted that fact. All the document does is state that I am admitting to be the father, and it's filed with, and also signed by, the county clerk. It in effect sits there and does nothing, unless in the rare case that I would actually need to use it for legal recourse. I never suggested that it over rides her ability to say that I'm not the father, but should she sign the AOP stating that I'm the father, this document certainly collaborates with that. It's inconsequential anyway. I was only pointing it out for a hypothetical scenario in which I would be defending myself in court on the technicality that i hadn't signed the AOP yet. I don't know if everyone here is suffering from a bad case of TLDR or if you're actually intentionally taking my words out of context to use in your rhetoric, but either way I just wanted to point that out.
I also never said that being the biological father immediately gives me rights; that's what I hired a lawyer for obviously for Christ's sake. What I did say was being the biological father gives me the ability to pursue those rights, there really is only a small chance I won't get them, and that was never the point of my OP anyway.
I just came here for some options, and instead what I got was a bunch of angry responses based on peoples personal biases. I had thought that people here would have been more professional than that, but I was clearly mistaken. I may has well have asked on 4chan, lol, I would have probably received a more intelligible response.
I'm not going to spend the energy to clip and copy paste the quotes, but as for my previous comment to the cop "pretending to be a lawyer", it was obviously in response to his snide little jab at me stating, "I lost my opportunity to play daddy", so don't make me out to be the one provoking the argument here. Upon learning that you are a cop, when I said, "that explains everything", what I meant was it explains why you are so arrogant, and to that point, you clearly don't even know your own job, so you may want to rethink that education of your's 'friend'. As for calling me a "dick" I prefer to use the term "defensive", but everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
In regards to the OG meme that you guys think is so cute, what is there to even come back and say I was right about? I said I'm not going to the hospital, it was just something I was curious about, and you guys convinced that it isn't feasible.
Thanks for your time, try not to be so angry it can cause high blood pressure.
Re: Does an Unmarried Father Have the Right to See His Child at Hospital when Born
Since OP is so convinced mom is going to sign the AOP here is some food for thought
Quote:
This form can be used to establish the parentage of a child and may be used to have information on the father of a child added
to the certificate of birth for the child. This affidavit may be completed at the time of the child’s birth or at any other time after the
birth.
Mom may just take her sweet time in filling this out in which case OP is going to be sitting for a bit whether he files for paternity or not. Mom has every right to just SIT on the form and make OP squirm
Quote:
Completion of this affidavit is voluntary. It indicates the parents wish to acknowledge parentage of a child. The form may be used
by parents who were not married when the child was born or when the child was conceived to legally establish their parentage of
a child.
And if mom decides she no longer wants/needs CS then OP is again, stuck
Mom and Gma should unfriend OP on FB
Above from: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Parentage_10872_7.pdf
The intent to claim paternity
Quote:
PROBATE CODE OF 1939 (EXCERPT)
Act 288 of 1939
710.33 Notice of intent to claim paternity.
Sec. 33.
(1) Before the birth of a child born out of wedlock, a person claiming under oath to be the father of the child may file a verified notice of intent to claim paternity with the court in any county of this state. The form of the notice shall be prescribed by the director of the department of public health and provided to the court. The notice shall include the claimant's address. On the next business day after receipt of the notice the court shall transmit the notice to the vital records division of the department of public health. If the mother's address is stated on the notice, the vital records division shall send a copy of the notice by first-class mail to the mother of the child at the stated address.
(2) A person filing a notice of intent to claim paternity shall be presumed to be the father of the child for purposes of this chapter unless the mother denies that the claimant is the father. Such a notice is admissible in a paternity proceeding under Act No. 205 of the Public Acts of 1956, as amended, being sections 722.711 to 722.730 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and shall create a rebuttable presumption as to the paternity of that child for purposes of that act. Such a notice shall create a rebuttable presumption as to paternity of the child for purposes of dependency or neglect proceedings under chapter 12a.
(3) A person who timely files a notice of intent to claim paternity shall be entitled to notice of any hearing involving that child to determine the identity of the father of the child and any hearing to determine or terminate his paternal rights to the child.
History: Add. 1974, Act 296, Eff. Jan. 1, 1975
and once again Mom can draw this out should she get a bug by refuting OP's claim at being the father
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(dko...ame=mcl-710-33