forum crasher has a custody/parental rights question

[spicyrock]

when dh and i got pregnant with dd, we were in a very long term relationship but had chosen not to marry. we changed our minds some time after her birth, for many reasons, the most important of which are deep love and taxes

in my state (georgia) unwed mothers have full parental rights of babies unless and until dad goes to court and fights to change that, even if the father has legally declared paternity (dh signed the affidavit of paternity and the bc at dd's birth). so i've had full and sole legal rights over dd- did that change when we got married? or is this still the case?

the question is academic- we aren't splitting up or anything. but it is good to know where one stands. what brought this question up is that i am preparing a will, and i am going to name my father as dd's guardian if dh and i should die untimely deaths. can i make this decision (and others like it) without his permission? i mean legally, not ethically...

[ProtoLawyer]

I can't speak for Georgia (you may wanna consult a family law attorney) and this is not legal advice, nor am I going to comment on the wisdom of making decisions unilaterally...

But here in WI, single mothers also get full legal and physical custody (even if Dad signs a paternity acknowledgement) unless/until something different is established (though in many cases--including in most long-term relationships like yours--nothing is formally established and schools, doctors, etc. treat Dad as a full parent anyway); however, marrying your child's dad "legitimates" the birth and grants him the same rights he would have had if you'd been married at the time of the birth. So, in WI, the rights would have changed.

As for naming a guardian--keep in mind a guardian designation is not as iron clad as, say, who gets the grandfather clock. It's more easily contested in the best interests of the children, and if the guardian is unable or unwilling to serve and there's no secondary named, the court has to decide and there isn't a set formula like there is for an asset.

It is my belief you can name whoever you want as a guardian, and your husband can separately name whoever he wants, and the laws of your state that determine what happens if two people whose wills mention each other die at the same time will decide whose designation gets more weight.

What you probably can't do is name a guardian and bind your husband to it in case you predecease him--if you die and your husband decides he'd rather his sister take care of your kids, he can do so.

[greenemami]

I *think* that you would have equal rights now. Dp and his ex-wife were not married when their daughter was born, but when they divorced they had to they did a whole custody mediation/agreement thing and I don't believe it was ever assumed that she had full custody since they were married, even though they weren't when their dd was born. He was always listed on the b.c. and did sign the paternity forms when their dd was born.

I'm not sure if the law giving sole custody to the mom is the same in my state (PA) though.

I think you can write whatever you want in your will and I assume they would have to "fight it out" if your husband named somebody else as guardian in his will and you both died at the same time.

Again, this is all just what I think, so definitely check into it further!

[spicyrock]

Originally Posted by ProtoLawyer

I can't speak for Georgia (you may wanna consult a family law attorney) and this is not legal advice, nor am I going to comment on the wisdom of making decisions unilaterally...

But here in WI, single mothers also get full legal and physical custody (even if Dad signs a paternity acknowledgement) unless/until something different is established (though in many cases--including in most long-term relationships like yours--nothing is formally established and schools, doctors, etc. treat Dad as a full parent anyway); however, marrying your child's dad "legitimates" the birth and grants him the same rights he would have had if you'd been married at the time of the birth. So, in WI, the rights would have changed.

As for naming a guardian--keep in mind a guardian designation is not as iron clad as, say, who gets the grandfather clock. It's more easily contested in the best interests of the children, and if the guardian is unable or unwilling to serve and there's no secondary named, the court has to decide and there isn't a set formula like there is for an asset.

It is my belief you can name whoever you want as a guardian, and your husband can separately name whoever he wants, and the laws of your state that determine what happens if two people whose wills mention each other die at the same time will decide whose designation gets more weight.

What you probably can't do is name a guardian and bind your husband to it in case you predecease him--if you die and your husband decides he'd rather his sister take care of your kids, he can do so.

that makes sense. thanks for assuaging my curiosity. for the record, my husband is an excellent father- i'd go so far as to say he is at times a better parent than i am, myself- and i wouldn't actually make a decision like this without his input. he agreed with me about naming my dad as guardian. but the topic made me curious about these remote but possible situations.