I Know This Has Been Said Over and Over Again But....

[Blackcat31]

Max I just checked and the law in Mn is quite similar to Georgia's. If you were not married to the child's father then:

Mn statute 257.541 states: "The biological mother of a child born to a mother who was not married to the child's father when the child was born and was not married to the child's father when the child was conceived has sole custody of the child until paternity has been established under sections 257.51 to 257.74, or until custody is determined in a separate proceeding under section 518.156."

Therefore just as in Georgia a father can be ordered to pay child support to said child and still have zero right of access to that child.

That has not been my experience here at all...

A declaration of parentage is what usually defines who is and who isn't a legal parent.

Whether mom has legal custody of not.... If a parent I've never met shows up here with the police, I can't deny that parent access to their child.

[Blackcat31]

257.02 SURRENDER OF PARENTAL RIGHTS.
No person other than the parents or relatives may assume the permanent care and custody of a child under 14 years of age unless authorized so to do by an order or decree of court. However, if a parent of a child who is being cared for by a relative dies, or if the parent is not or cannot fulfill parental duties with respect to the child, the relative may bring a petition under section 260C.141. Except in proceedings for adoption or by a consent decree entered under section 257C.07, no parent may assign or otherwise transfer to another parental rights or duties with respect to the permanent care and custody of a child under 14 years of age. Any such transfer shall be void.

257.025 CUSTODY DISPUTES.
(a) In any custody or parenting time proceeding involving unmarried parents, the court shall consider and evaluate all relevant factors in section 518.17, subdivision 1, to determine the best interests of the child.
(b) The fact that the parents of the child are not or were never married to each other shall not be determinative of the custody of the child.
(c) A person may seek custody of a child by filing a petition or motion pursuant to section 518.156.

Here is some other really good info on establishing who the legal parent is/isn't:

https://mn.gov/dhs/people-we-serve/children-and-families/services/child-support/programs-services/establishing-parentage.jsp

[MunchkinWrangler]

Do you have a recognition of parentage form signed? I ask this because I am in a similar situation but not to this extreme. I am considered to have sole physical custody, which means my ds residence is considered mine but I also have the right to child support automatically without any tests or waiting. This makes his father legally responsible for him and also gives him the right to file for parenting time. He is not granted physical custody but again can file for it. This form basically expedites the process for both of us.

In order for your husband to gain adoption rights, the bio father has to terminate his parental rights. This would still only give your husband legal custody another hearing would have to be made for physical custody.

When you are not married to the father physical custody is automatically granted to the mother. If you are divorced it becomes automatic joint custody unless there are reasons against it.

With that said, I do not have the right to withhold contact with my son from his father. This is not in the best interests of the child, MN is a state that leans this way and upholds that the child has the right to have a relationship with both parents as long as it is a healthy one.

That's my .02.

[Max]

Absent an Order legitimating the child, the mother has sole legal and physical custody of that child.Even if he signs the birth certificate and pays child support he still has zero rights.

I have enrolled several children in this situation and will allow the father to pick up a child if he is on the list. However, if the mother removes the privilege, I will NOT release. I will call the law and had to do this very recently when things got ugly between the parents of one of my dcbs.

However, if the parents are married, even if they are in the process of separation; absent a restraining order that specifically forbids contact I can not legally prevent either parent from picking up their child.

I think this is exactly what she was getting at, and the big difference to note being whether the child was born out of wedlock.

IF the biological father chooses to give up his parental rights (which IME, isn't usually allowed....too many fathers doing so to avoid child support etc) then and only then can your son be adopted by your husband. I do believe in some cases the bio parent can give up rights IF there is another parent (your husband) wanting to take over. But normally, fathers can't just give up their rights as that usually leaves the state as acting "father" and having to financially support said child. kwim?

You're exactly right in this, the state doesn't want to act as 'father' which is why terminations can be very hard, unless a step-parent is willing to step in.

Do you have a recognition of parentage form signed? I ask this because I am in a similar situation but not to this extreme. I am considered to have sole physical custody, which means my ds residence is considered mine but I also have the right to child support automatically without any tests or waiting. This makes his father legally responsible for him and also gives him the right to file for parenting time. He is not granted physical custody but again can file for it. This form basically expedites the process for both of us.

Yes I have an RoP and told the lawyer this. Everything you're saying lines up with what the lawyers have told us, and makes sense as to why I was able to get a court order for child support.

In order for your husband to gain adoption rights, the bio father has to terminate his parental rights. This would still only give your husband legal custody another hearing would have to be made for physical custody.

We thought that would be the case, even had multiple lawyers told us we would have to undertake 2 cases... One to terminate bio dad's rights and a second for the adoption itself.

BUT, with a little bit of luck and a crafty lawyer, not necessarily.. Also depends on the judge. The lawyer we ended up hiring tried a new approach and long story short, both cases turned into one! Much less $$ and time!!

We went to court last month and bio dad was a no-show (expected when you've had a warrant out for 3 years ) so we ended up getting everything we petitioned for. It was great news for us No additional hearings.

[Max]

257.025 CUSTODY DISPUTES.
(a) In any custody or parenting time proceeding involving unmarried parents, the court shall consider and evaluate all relevant factors in section 518.17, subdivision 1, to determine the best interests of the child.
(b) The fact that the parents of the child are not or were never married to each other shall not be determinative of the custody of the child.
(c) A person may seek custody of a child by filing a petition or motion pursuant to section 518.156.

Here is some other really good info on establishing who the legal parent is/isn't:
https://mn.gov/dhs/people-we-serve/c...-parentage.jsp

That makes sense for deciding custody but I wonder if it doesn't necessarily apply to this situation (mother legally being required to grant visits w/o an order).

I'll check that link out as soon as I can and forward this question to our lawyer. The one we ended up hiring wasn't the same lawyer I was referring to in the original post.

[MunchkinWrangler]

If he was a no show in court then that is exactly how the court handles it. They assume that a no show, not to mention a notice is given with a request for a response to action, is the acceptance of the termination. At this point, even if bio dad files a petition, the court very rarely reverses their decision.

[Max]

They assume that a no show, not to mention a notice is given with a request for a response to action, is the acceptance of the termination. At this point, even if bio dad files a petition, the court very rarely reverses their decision.

Yep

It was really nice to have our lawyer petition it as one case instead of two!

[Max]

The email to our lawyer is off! I specifically asked:In the situation of an unwed birth mother in MN, without any court orders explicitly indicating custody/visitation/protection/etc., does a daycare provider have to release the child to the bio dad?

And then: Does this change if bio dad is on the birth cert or signs an ROP?

I also found the following:
257.541
Subdivision 1.Mother's right to custody. The biological mother of a child born to a mother who was not married to the child's father when the child was born and was not married to the child's father when the child was conceived has sole custody of the child until paternity has been established under sections 257.51 to 257.74, or until custody is determined in a separate proceeding under section 518.156.

257.51 to 257.74 is the Parentage Act. It defines 'parent child relationship' and states this relationship may exist regardless of the marital status of the parents.

257.54 says how this relationship is established and includes:
(b) the biological father may be established under sections 257.51 to 257.74 or 257.75

257.75 covers an ROP and includes:
Subd. 3.Effect of recognition.

(c) The recognition is:
(1) a basis for bringing an action for the following:
(i) to award temporary custody or parenting time pursuant to section 518.131;
(ii) to award permanent custody or parenting time to either parent;
(iii) establishing a child support obligation which may include up to the two years immediately preceding the commencement of the action;
(iv) ordering a contribution by a parent under section 256.87;
(v) ordering a contribution to the reasonable expenses of the mother's pregnancy and confinement, as provided under section 257.66, subdivision 3; or
(vi) ordering reimbursement for the costs of blood or genetic testing, as provided under section 257.69, subdivision 2;
(2) determinative for all other purposes related to the existence of the parent and child relationship; and
(3) entitled to full faith and credit in other jurisdictions.

I c/p what I thought were the important parts but after reading through the statutes, to me, it appears that unwed birth moms maintain sole custody and an ROP allows for the birth dad to pursue visits if they wish. But none of this automatically grants birth dads any visiting rights right off the bat.

The ROP and birth certificate are tools to establish a parent child relationship but establishing that relationship, does not automatically establish visiting or custody rights for birth fathers.

[Max]

Here is some other really good info on establishing who the legal parent is/isn't:
https://mn.gov/dhs/people-we-serve/c...-parentage.jsp

I checked that link out. It verifies that an ROP establishes parentage, but I still think it leaves it open that the birth father does not automatically have custody or visiting rights.

I see it as: an ROP establishes parentage, which is a critical/necessary tool when a parent wants to pursue rights, but an ROP does not, in itself, automatically grant those rights.

[Max]

Update

I just heard back from our lawyer, he said:

To answer your question, an unwed mother does have sole legal and physical custody. The unwed father has no rights until a court grants them to him. He can sign an ROP, but all that does is give him the right to petition for visits or custody. Rights don’t spring biology. So you can—and should--deny a father the right to take a child in your care, unless you have written consent from custodial parent. It’s best to have written statements from unwed mothers stating who they authorize to pick up their child. If a father has no custody rights, the mother can still grant visits at her own discretion.

[Blackcat31]

I just heard back from our lawyer, he said:

To answer your question, an unwed mother does have sole legal and physical custody. The unwed father has no rights until a court grants them to him. He can sign an ROP, but all that does is give him the right to petition for visits or custody. Rights don’t spring biology. So you can—and should--deny a father the right to take a child in your care, unless you have written consent from custodial parent. It’s best to have written statements from unwed mothers stating who they authorize to pick up their child. If a father has no custody rights, the mother can still grant visits at her own discretion.

The ONLY way I would deny a father access to his child is IF I have paperwork from the courts saying I can.

I would never deny a father access to his child based solely on what the unwed mother writes down on a piece of paper.

[daycarediva]

The ONLY way I would deny a father access to his child is IF I have paperwork from the courts saying I can.

I would never deny a father access to his child based solely on what the unwed mother writes down on a piece of paper.

If he is on the birth certificate, he is the father.

Is there a reason we are just denying these fathers the right to see their children? I find most custody issues with this situation just done out of pure spite, it only hurts the child.

If there IS a reason to stop the father from seeing the child, it needs to be court documented (even police protection order!)

[Meeko]

Obviously states differ, but Utah law says we cannot withold a child from a parent unless we have specific court documents stating clearly that they cannot have the child.

It is considered kidnapping to stop a parent from taking their own child. Providers are on thin ice if they decide to side with a parent and deny the other access just because they want to.

I make it very clear to single parents that unless I have paperwork to the contrary, I will not stop the other parent from picking up at any time.

[Max]

The ONLY way I would deny a father access to his child is IF I have paperwork from the courts saying I can.

I would never deny a father access to his child based solely on what the unwed mother writes down on a piece of paper.

The statement that 'you should deny pickup from the father without written consent from unwed mother' sounds more like legal advice, not necessarily a law. But I would imagine if a DCP released a child to the father against the custodial mother's permission, that DCP could possibly be in trouble because technically the unwed father doesn't have any custodial or visitation rights.

If he is on the birth certificate, he is the father.

Is there a reason we are just denying these fathers the right to see their children? I find most custody issues with this situation just done out of pure spite, it only hurts the child.

If there IS a reason to stop the father from seeing the child, it needs to be court documented (even police protection order!)

The father being on a birth cert or ROP doesn't grant him legal rights to custody. At least here in MN. He may be the father but I'm just speaking from a legal perspective.

Sure, some mothers will do it out of spite and for no good reason but sometimes it's for the child's safety.

In my case, I can tell you for certain my child wouldn't have been safe with birth dad - and I didn't have no where near enough concrete evidence for a protection order. Nor did I have $20,000 to drop on a lawyer (yes, that's what we were told ballpark to expect to pay).

Obviously states differ, but Utah law says we cannot withold a child from a parent unless we have specific court documents stating clearly that they cannot have the child.

It is considered kidnapping to stop a parent from taking their own child. Providers are on thin ice if they decide to side with a parent and deny the other access just because they want to.

I make it very clear to single parents that unless I have paperwork to the contrary, I will not stop the other parent from picking up at any time.

That makes sense if that's what your state laws say. I'm just relaying what MN law says

[Blackcat31]

The statement that 'you should deny pickup from the father without written consent from unwed mother' sounds more like legal advice, not necessarily a law. But I would imagine if a DCP released a child to the father against the custodial mother's permission, that DCP could possibly be in trouble because technically the unwed father doesn't have any custodial or visitation rights.



The father being on a birth cert or ROP doesn't grant him legal rights to custody. At least here in MN. He may be the father but I'm just speaking from a legal perspective.

Sure, some mothers will do it out of spite and for no good reason but sometimes it's for the child's safety.

In my case, I can tell you for certain my child wouldn't have been safe with birth dad - and I didn't have no where near enough concrete evidence for a protection order. Nor did I have $20,000 to drop on a lawyer (yes, that's what we were told ballpark to expect to pay).



That makes sense if that's what your state laws say. I'm just relaying what MN law says

That is not what MN law says. It's what YOUR lawyer is saying. It is not MN law/regulations for child care providers

Nope, the provider would be in trouble for NOT allowing the father to pick up.

The ONLY way I can deny a father (custodial or not) access to his child is if I have COURT PAPERS saying I can't let the child go.

A written statement from the unwed mother will NOT protect me nor does it give me the right to deny the father.

If the unwed mother does not want the father having access, then she needs to go to court and get the proper paperwork.

That is MN FAMILY CHILD CARE LAW (Rule 2) which I am legally bound to follow.

http://tomcopelandblog.com/how-to-resolve-custody-disputes-with-parents