TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 9 °C Sunday 19 May, 2013

New law to clear up paternity confusion

Joan Burton will bring in legislation that will end the presumption that a husband is the father of all the children born during a marriage.

Minister Joan Burton
Minister Joan Burton
Image: Laura Hutton/Photocall Ireland

LEGISLATION IS TO be rolled out to enable a mother to prove that her husband is not the father of all the children born during the marriage.

Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Joan Burton, gave information on the new law to Deputy Denis Naughten, who asked her in a recent parliamentary question when she planned to introduce the legislation.

The legislation will be in line with paragraph 4.12 of the Report on Family Relationships by the Law Reform Commission. This part of the report contains a recommendation that a statutory declaration, made by the mother of a child and accompanied by evidence to the effect that she has had no contact with her husband within 10 months of the birth of her child, and that he is not the child’s father, “should be sufficient to rebut the legal presumption that he is the father of all children of the marriage”.

Minister Burton explained that under current legislation, section 46 of the Status of Children Act 1987 provides for a legal presumption that a man in a subsisting marriage (or in a marriage that subsisted up to ten months before the birth of a child) is the father of all children of that marriage.

Under the Civil Registration Act 2004, a woman who is in a marriage can rebut the presumption of paternity by providing to the registrar of births either:

  • A statutory declaration of the person or each person to whom the mother was married at some time during the period of 10 months prior to the birth that he is not the father of the child, or
  • A statutory declaration of the mother that she has been living apart from the person who is or who formerly was her husband during the period of 10 months ending immediately before the birth of the child by virtue of a decree of divorce, a decree of divorce a mensa et thor o, a decree of nullity or a deed of separation, or
  • A court order which names another man as the father of the child.

Minister Burton commented:

This and other proposals contained in the report that are relevant to the Civil Registration Service are currently under active consideration and it is expected that I will be in a position to introduce legislation on this, and other aspects of civil registration, in 2012.

Read: New law may make it compulsory to include father’s name on birth cert>

Read next:

Comments (29 Comments)

  • Does it work the other way? I.e. can fathers use the same legislation to prove paternity where they are not the husband?

    Reply
  • After that, can we start chasing fathers to pay for their children for whom we pay single parents allowance?

    Reply
    • Crazy law..it dosen’t make sense one bit..

      Reply
    • Sharrow 29/04/12 #

      We already do chase them but we need better penalties to enforce the maintenance orders.

      Reply
    • They tried that in the UK through the Child Support Agency and it was an unmitigated disaster. In the end, it had something like a 90% failure rate in actually clawing back child support costs and many men saw it as a witch hunt. Part of the problem is that modern families are highly complex – you have blended families, women may decide to have a child on their own, relationships ultimately break down, also unemployment may impact ability to pay on both sides. I think the law is a good idea in the context of providing proper recognition for fathers outside of the traditionally assumed family law, but there is a lot more that needs to be done in order to give proper rights to fathers who are not married to the mothers of their children.

      Reply
  • While she’s at it why not give automatic legal recognition and rights to unmarried fathers? In Irish law ‘fathers’ don’t exist, only ‘husbands’ do.

    Reply
  • Yet again the law forgets about the forgotten father , why not make it law that Unmarried fathers get the same rights as Unmarried mothers , this would make it fair and would save a lot of court hours , with people with no skill set ( for this job ) deciding what’s best for your child . The family law court system over here is not very fair or family based at all , so joan be fair to all

    Reply
  • this is all very well, but when will she get round to banning fornication………….

    Reply
  • Single fathers in this country have NO rights. That’s just the way it goes. I’m a single father that has always been responsible for my son and I am proud to be so! Yet his mother can decide to not allow me have contact in the morning if she chooses! I’m lucky that I don’t have that problem! But unfortunately many responsible fathers do because some women choose to use their children as a way to get back at their ex partners. unfortunately there is also a lot of men in this country who will just walk away from their own flesh and blood. On the other side though there are the “single” mothers who are using lone parents payments as a career choice or else making false claims ie. cohabitating or working for cash. Until there is complete reform of the system nothing is going to change! It simply doesn’t work because it is very biased towards mothers and it does nothing to hold deadbeat dads responsible

    Reply
  • Joan Burton clearing up confusion?!?! Not like her.

    Reply
  • Sharrow 29/04/12 #

    It is a crazy system they should just standardise how births are registered.
    Currently un married parents have to both go and register the birth of the child, there should be no difference with married parents. This gives the husband and presumed father the chance to say, it’s not mine.

    Given that divorce takes so long in this country there are several children born each year and as their mother is still married the state assumes that her husband is the father of the child, daft tbh.

    Reply
    • Sharrow
      No. they both don’t have to go to have the baby registered . My son’s father would not consent to be on the birth cert , there by labelling my son and myself forever more… I got a court order blah blah ….. and eventually had his name on my son’s birth cert. My son has my name and has never met his ”father” ,but his name is on the birth cert which in my opinion is only right .It takes TWO to make a baby and that is THE point. All fathers should be named .

      Reply
    • The situation that the state assumes the husband is the father although seperated is an out dated law and I am glad it is to be ”cleared up” . It is unfair on everyone including the father and the ”husband” .

      Reply
    • susie that must have changed since ur son wad born! sharrow is right both have to be present married or not and both need photo i.d to prove who the are!

      Reply
    • I don’t know if it is changed now .My son is 10 and I got his original birth cert changed in 2006…..

      Reply
    • maybe cause you got court order to have it done.. my self and husband had 2 children before.we married and both needed to be present!! we had another child since been married and it was the same both of us had to be there.. with i.d!!

      Reply
  • As a woman if you have a child with a man and are not married to him and chose to give that child your own surname then marry the father of that child to have their name changed to match your married name and the fathers name the father has to legally adopt his own child and it can actually be denied. It’s a crazy system. As to single parent allowance. It’s for the parent the children reside with not necessarily the mother.

    Reply
  • A man is still a father or not a father dependant on a decision of the mother. For men that is legal limbo. Women are all about ‘my body, my choice’ but this apparently does not extend to men. This is just another law to make it easier for sngle mothers to WORK the system and continue to scam the taxpayer.

    Reply
  • Joan Bruton is actually John Bruton now for ya!!

    Reply
  • For people who believe that single mothers are persecuted they should do some research. Single fathers have no rights & are not recognised by the state. Childrens welfare is totally dictated by a female agenda in this country. And when you have this kind of inequality you will have abuse by fathers & mothers. The children of this country are more at risk from this topic than anything before including child abuse. 95% of fathers that go through a relationship break up never see their children again. And the single biggest topic of this remains money. Our children have become currency. As.a nation we never could protect our children shame on us.

    Reply
    • Sorry but I can’t bear this ‘shame on us’ thing. I agree that the system is biased, but I don’t accept an ounce of shame for that. I haven’t contributed to the bias at all, nor have I supported anyone who did. Without giving away too much personal info, I’ve spoken out against it. It’s not my shame to bear

      Reply
  • The only reason she is looking is to screw Simone for money. It’s possible to be pro child without being anti mother or father.

    Reply
  • And if a mother/wife walks out of a marriage and new child and there’s no contact from her for over 10 months of the birth can the father declare that she is not the legal mother of the child?

    Reply
  • Arch Stauton you have no clue…

    Reply
  • More pointless giggerish.

    Reply

Add New Comment