From: bevans@carina.unm.edu (Mathemagician)
Subject: Re: Equal Male Rights
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 10:13:05 GMT
Organization: Society for the Preservation of E. coli

In article <1992Aug21.170049.584@telebit.com> brunner@telebit.com (Eric Brunner) writes:
>In article <+j_nzs#@lynx.unm.edu> bevans@carina.unm.edu (Mathemagician) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug18.183212.29094@telebit.com> brunner@telebit.com (Eric Brunner) writes:
>[in response to what I thought was a question about obtaining standing to
> assert a claim for parental rights, omitted]

>>I don't think you understand the point I was making.

>Shit, here I thought you were asking a question, and you were making a point.

Notice that you didn't answer the questions I asked in making my point.
Just what *is* the status of the biological father in the case where
the mother doesn't want the child to whom she just gave birth?

When he has to go to court to get custody of that child, is he
considered an adoptive parent or a biological parent?  That is, does
he have the right to sue for child support?

>Not to mention somehow moving from the real-life problem of fathers seeking
>to obtain custody of children who's paternity is not known, to hospital
>practice of presuming observed birth as a fairly reliable indicator or legal
>maternity.

Again, you apparently don't understand what I'm talking about.  I'm
talking about what differences, if any, exist between the mother and
the father in terms of gaining custody of their children just born and
whether or not they can sue the other parent for support.

I explained the situation for the mother in order to provide a
reference for you to answer my question:  What is the status of the
father?

I am asking why the father has to go to court.  I am asking if he does
gain custody of the child after going to court, what is his legal
status with regard to that child?  Is he considered an adoptive
parent, thus, unable to sue for child support, or is he in a similar
situation to the mother and able to sue for child support?

>I was writing a longer piece yesterday, but I'm glad I didn't
>waste more time than I did.

The only time you've wasted is in not answering my questions.  This
makes three times I've asked them...care to give a shot at answering
them?  I'll even take an "I don't know."

>Mr. Evans, is there the slightest possibility that your "work" in a.c-s will
>contribute to anyone else's life than your own? In particular, a parent
>reading and writing in a.c-s? If after mature reflection you arive at
>the conclusion that it is doubtful, edit your newsgroups line accordingly.

I would assume that people in the situation described:  mother doesn't
want the child to whom she just gave birth, but the father does, will
benefit from knowing what the situation is.  When I talk about this to
other people, they will hopefully work to change the situation if they
deem it unfair.

Now, if you can't see how defining the father's role in this and
whether or not he can sue for child-support are issues that would
legitimately be discussed in a.c-s, I wonder what the group is for.
Yes, I am posting from soc.men, but the topic to which I am
specifically referring does, indeed, belong in both groups so far as
getting answers to my questions are concerned.

Why does the father have to sue for custody of his own child?

If he does attain custody, can he sue her for child support, or is he
considered an adoptive parent?

-- 
Brian Evans                |     "Bad mood, bad mood...Sure I'm in a bad mood!
bevans@carina.unm.edu      |      I haven't had sex...*EVER!*" -- Virgin Mary
Newsgroups: soc.men