Mother wins battle to keep baby secret
8:33am Saturday 24th November 2007
Comments (3)A MOTHER who had a child after a one-night stand with a work colleague won the right yesterday to keep the birth a secret from the father.
The woman, 20, went to the Court of Appeal after a county court ordered that her parents and the father should be told.
A legal guardian and a local authority made the application to a county court after the mother said she wanted the baby girl adopted immediately after she gave birth in hospital.
Three appeal judges yesterday agreed that the mother had "the ultimate veto" over whom should be told about her child.
They ordered that the local authority and guardian should take no steps to identify the father or tell him about the birth of the baby girl, now 19 weeks old.
She is currently placed with foster carers.
There was also an order barring the authority from introducing the girl to any of the mother's family to assess them as potential carers.
The court had been told that the family learned about the child after the local authority made inquiries.
All the names and locations of everyone involved in the case cannot be published by order of the court to protect the mother's wishes that the father never knows about his child.
Counsel representing the mother had told the judges at a hearing earlier this month that no one had been told about the birth because the mother did not want anyone to know.
Lady Justice Arden, in a ruling given yesterday, said the county court judge had made his order because he believed that the local authority had a duty under the law to find out as much information about the background of the family as it could.
But she said there was no such obligation - only a duty to serve the best interests of the child.
The judge said the mother was 19 when she became pregnant and did not realise until a late stage.
From then on she kept her pregnancy a secret from her family. She lived on her own, pursuing a career and did not believe she could look after the child.
The judge said the woman asked for the child to be adopted, saying she did not believe her divorced parents could provide a home for the child.
She did not want the father to know anything about the baby.
Lady Justice Arden said this was not a violation of his rights to family life under the Human Rights Act because he had no right to be violated.
Lord Justice Thorpe said: "The law improves the opportunity of the child of anonymous birth to search out its biological origin.
"However, the ultimate veto remains with the mother. Registers of information are in place to lead the searching child to the mother's door but the child has no right of entry if the mother, despite counselling, refuses to unlock it."
Last night, the decision was branded as a disgrace by fathers' rights groups. Fathers 4 Justice founder Matt O'Connor said: "It's appalling. That child will one day want to know what happened."
George McAuley, from the UK Men's Movement, said: "Every child should have the right to know its parents no matter what the circumstances of its conception.
"The rights of the child and the father have been trampled on by this decision."
Your Say YourThe Northern Echo
martin swash, middlesbrough says...
8:00pm Thu 13 Dec 07
Zaphod, USA says...
1:23am Sat 2 Feb 08
I live in the USA and slowly, over the past decade, the "Courts" are now realizing how important and WILLING Fathers are to children.
After spending 3 years and countless dollars, I have custody of my 3 kids, she walked away.
In this section
- Meningitis tot dons prosthetic legs to walk down the aisle
- Durham's police chief on Northern Ireland shortlist
- Inquest warning over drunken prank tragedy
- Man arrested after fatal accident
- Pedestrian seriously hurt outside Harrogate fire station
- Man arrested after taxi hits Grangetown pedestrian
- Two homes badly damaged in Ferryhill Station blaze
- Four in hospital after car leaves A1(M)
- Driver seriously hurt after HGV overturns in York
- Thief hails taxi after wrecking Boro star's Porsche
Sponsored Links
Local Advertisers
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
richarddorset, county durham says...
8:12pm Sun 2 Dec 07
"was not a violation of his rights to family life under the Human Rights Act because he had no right to be violated." Excuse me - the father does have rights to a family life - but is unaware that he now has a family, because you won't tell him!
Why is motherhood still sacrosanct but fatherhood is just regarded as an inconvenient truth?
One day, in about twenty years time, lots of youn adults will understand what the english family courts have done to them.
Hopefuly my two sons will realise this too. Happy Christmas Peter and Eduard F. - daddy still loves you. xx
From a father who was denied access by the mother, who turned his children against him, and the courts did sweet f.a. about it over fourt years other than ask for yet more reports to keep the mother happy, even though all reports indicated that the mother was being obstructive. What a waste of £15,000... I walked away.