Similar Posts
Glaubt ihr, dass er überfordert ist wegen dem Baby?
Guten Morgen liebe Community!🫶🏻 Ich mache mir Sorgen um einen guten Freund von mir. Er ist frisch gebackener Papa und wollte auch immer Kinder haben, erstmal als Info. Ich möchte nicht mit der Tür ins Haus fallen und ihn direkt fragen und sagen, dass ich mir Sorgen mache; weil wenns nicht so ist; wäre es…
Bin ich schwanger?
die ersten 10 min war nichts dort aber nach längeren liegen sah er so aus muss ich mir Gedanken machen?
Wer mag “Die Sendung mit der Maus”?
…. mit Lach und Sachgeschichten, heute mit… ”… Das war Spanisch…” … und natürlich mit der Maus und dem Elefanten!
Schwangerschafts Test leicht negativ?
Ich habe heute Morgen einen Schwangerschaftstest gemacht und er hat negativ angezeigt aber der Strich war nur zur Hälfte und ich habe meine Periode nicht bekommen aber leichte Schmierblutung kann es sein das der Test vielleicht ungültig war oder was bedeutet das?
An diejenigen, dessen Eltern rauchen. Habt ihr schonmal so richtig viel Rauch direkt abbekommen?
Falls ja, wie hat es sich angefühlt?
suchen buggy für feld und wald. wer hat tipps. haben quinny xtra im auge, ist der dafür geeignet?
das kind ist 18 monate und läuft auch schon ‘größere’ strecken.
In fact, I also find the system somewhat absurd, but a certain twisted logic is in it – one looks at the absolutely unfair current situation.
Mother and child are a unit in it. Mother and child are registered at the registry office. The father, now yes. There are two ways: if the mother is married, the husband automatically applies as a father. Point. Further information is not required. If, in advance, no one has objected to this, it is extremely difficult to change this even if the husband is not the biological producer.
If the mother is not married, there are several possibilities. Either she admits not to know the father. Or she’s giving a man as a father. He can then acknowledge fatherhood (either before or after birth) and then gives as a father – also here again: Whoever is a father is it, even if later doubts arise about it, which can even be proved. It is important that the mother has no duty to give a man as a father.
According to my knowledge, a man (except he is married to the mother, which automatically makes him a father) can also do little to become a father without the consent of the mother. She can give the father who is asked. Whether it is otherwise possible, so that a man goes off and says he is the father of the child and that must then also be entered, is not so easy. It goes, but in doubt it has to do with judgment etc.
You can speculate about the reasons. I suppose it’s about protection. Thus, no man, e.g. after a relationship with domestic violence or at worst rape, from which a child emerges, cannot easily come to the address of mother and child. On the other hand, the mother naturally allows her unloved men who would not be harmful to the development of the child to keep their neck off – which can be a shame for the child. As always, the legislature goes from a largely cure world – if both parents wanted the child, why shouldn’t you tell the others? But that’s it. All that is well meant (e.g. for protection) can be abused somehow. In any case, this is in my opinion the reason why the mothers come with in the note at the post office and the fathers only come about the paternity recognition after the father was appointed by the mother or the marriage certificate.
This part that you’re a husband automatically a father, by the way, I find quite obsolete. But good – if everyone agrees this can also be clarified before birth. Just as stupid is that children can be protected from dangerous fathers – but not from dangerous mothers. Because even if there may be more rare, there are also. I don’t know if the system comes into reform with the increasing disappearance of the classic family.
Because it’s clear she’s the mother. Anyone who is the father is either known and is then also specified, or he is not known, but may be determined by a paternity test.
Because the name of the child’s father in children born out of marriage is only after the paternity has been recognized in the birth certificate.
In the case of married children – i.e. when the woman is married – the husband is always registered as a father of a child.
But the child is like me with the last name.
In the case of children born out of marriage, it also remains, except for the mother, that the child receives the surname of the father (with his consent).
Because the mother is always uniquely identifiable. The mother “need” but also enter the name of the father into the birth certificate. It’s just not proveable. The mother, on the other hand.
What a vulnerability. My son has a dark complexion, dark hair and dark eyes… The mother is bright. You can also prove it in your blood. So I don’t understand the attitude from the office.
And paternity tests without the consent of the party are strictly forbidden… you have no plan what I meant – but rumor.
The baby is born in a hospital where it usually brings a doctor or a midwife to the world. Child and mother are officially documented there. Color of the skin, interests, gender, door colour interested no S****
This has nothing to do with custody. And that you know that has nothing to do with what the law recognizes.
You can identify if you are identified by law. This has nothing to do with the skin colour, the name, hairstyle or the favourite food.
What is documented at birth is subject to certain regulations that ensure that from the moment of birth also the mother is documented. Blow. Do I speak against a wall?
I know very well, but I have the right to worry just like her. I don’t need a test either because I know it’s my kid.
Well you wrote but identifiable 😐
Mother wears child.