I`ve seen so many posts on LPS and made a plan on how to legalize it without exploiting women, and I`ve seen the opinions against. So I created a system to minimize loopholes. I recently came to this topic and although I consider myself a feminist (or egalitarian), I think men are powerless in some cases. Please read my plan, taking into account that humans are humans and not wild dogs. A parent`s parental rights are inherent, but can be revoked voluntarily or involuntarily by court order. The conditions under which a parent can voluntarily renounce his or her parental rights are extremely limited. The renunciation of parental rights means accepting the end of the legal relationship with one`s own child. After this period, you may still have child support, but you no longer have any other rights or obligations with respect to your child. States are specifically required to terminate parental rights if a child has been placed in foster care for 15 of the last 22 months. There are only three exceptions: A: In an ideal world, yes. But the current system does not improve anything.
The child still has a parent and receives a monthly paycheck. The paycheck is not the same as a loving and caring father. When LPS becomes legal, the child will have either one loving and caring parent or two loving and caring parents. The child will not have a loving parent and another parent who hates him and looks at a burden and sends a monthly paycheck and stays away from them. If man can abdicate his responsibility, there are no children. The woman can always make her decision, fully aware that the father has renounced her rights, but if she thinks she is capable enough, she continues the pregnancy. Usually not. Judges want children to have two parents to provide emotional and financial support. You can`t give up your parental rights to avoid dealing with a child`s behavioral problems, and you can`t give up your parental rights to avoid paying child support. As noted earlier, parents have protected “parental rights” by the Constitution, which include the right to prevent the adoption of a child without parental consent.
Given this coverage, adoption becomes a two-step process. First, the rights of the child`s biological parent(s) must be removed. After that, the child is free to be adopted by a new family or person. After the forfeiture of parental rights, the biological parents no longer have legal rights over a child. This is an ongoing situation. Termination may be voluntary or involuntary (by court order). What are the advantages of paternal devotion over voluntary parenting, where neither party involuntarily assumes parental responsibility for a child? It seems to me that paternal capitulation still leaves holes for women who inform men about pregnancy only after childbirth, for women who may be considering giving birth rather than seeking an abortion, but who fear possible future liability for child support if they give custody to the father, and completely neglect the current problem, that people are forced to pay child support that does not belong to them or on the basis of gifts or support beforehand. It seems that the goal is not so much to solve problems as to “balance the balance” on abortion. And that`s not going to happen.
Abortion is in fact a unisex right; If men can get pregnant, so can we. There is no need to compensate for this. What we need is another unisex approach that was not specifically designed for both genders, and I think the best option is parenting buy-in, as opposed to a system like the one you`re proposing that facilitates removal. The court must also determine whether revoking your parental rights is in the best interests of the child. For example, if the termination is to allow another adult to adopt the child, the court often finds that it is in the best interests of the child. However, if you are physically dangerous or harm the child`s well-being, the court is more likely to override your rights. These women knew that abortion was possible for them, they knew that the man was giving up all his rights, but nevertheless she decided to have the baby. Next, I think it`s fair to assume that she is financially stable and capable enough to give the child proper care and support. There are many women who are quite capable of thinking that they can be single and have a child and use donor sperm to achieve this.
• The court is obliged to appoint a guardian to the proceedings to represent the best interests of the child in the dismissal proceedings. A request for remission does not require the appointment of a guardian ad litem. A: That`s the misunderstanding here. The man cannot go to the birth of the baby. Let`s say he didn`t sign an LPS document, and then the baby is born and he says, “Eww, the baby is so ugly, I don`t want to be responsible for that.” Well, that`s not even possible. He is obliged to provide for the child`s needs. If he still denies, then the woman can take the case to court, the court will ask the man to show the LPS and BAM document! He can`t, so he`s done! No choice but to take care of the child. If you think you can`t continue to care for your child, giving up your parental rights may not be your only option. This is a serious decision you should make until you speak to an experienced child protection attorney in New Jersey. A competent lawyer can help you understand the impact of waiving your rights, the conditions under which you can make such a decision, and which option may be in your child`s best interest. And if waiving your parental rights is the best option, a lawyer can help you navigate subsequent proceedings while protecting your best interests.
The competent court for such cases is the Juvenile Court.