I don’t how you could possibly misinterpret the statute, it’s pretty clear. But let me provide a couple more statutes:
Oregon Revised Statute 109.070 (1) The paternity of a person may be established as follows: California Family Code 7540. Except as provided in Section 7541, the child of a wife cohabiting with her husband, who is not impotent or sterile, is conclusively presumed to be a child of the marriage.
(a) The child of a wife cohabiting with her husband who was not impotent or sterile at the time of the conception of the child shall be conclusively presumed to be the child of her husband, whether or not the marriage of the husband and wife may be void.
(b) A child born in wedlock, there being no judgment of separation from bed or board, shall be presumed to be the child of the mother’s husband, whether or not the marriage of the husband and wife may be void.
"And third…what about all the men who have knowingly falsified BCs…are you going to prosecute them? I’m talking about men who KNEW that the baby wasn’t theirs, but for whatever reason, accepted responsibility. Are you going to turn them into criminals?" Falsifying legal documents is a criminal offense whether it is a male or female committing the offense. You desperate grasp at gender bias as a retort is ungrounded.
WTF…what “gender bias”!?! It takes one hell of a man to willingly assume the “burden” of another man’s child and YOU want to criminalize his selfless act!!!
"But the hospital would NOT allow her to put John’s name on the birth certificate because she was still married and so it was left blank." The hospital has no right to be completing the form or telling anyone what goes on the form. They also do not sign the form. I'm sure that what you are saying happened, Gecko, but if you think this is standard, it isn't. Where I live, the BC is not done at the hospital and they do not ask you if you are married nor care even if you volunteer the information. They want to know who the mother is and who the father is.
Uh huh. Considering that I know of several other states (would you like a complete listing) in which the BC is completed AT the hospital, I would have to say that that IS “standard”. As for you saying that the hospital has no “right”…this is from California Family Code 7571(as):
"I agree that once paternity is established, the father should have the same 'custodial' rights as the mother, but we KNOW that that is not true" And what I am saying is that it IS true, from a technical standpoint, or legal standpoint. Is it common practice? No, but what you are talking about is the outdated "Tender Years Doctrine". It has been banned as unconstitutional, and it is no longer the law of the land. Does that mean it doesn't happen anyway? Of course it does. I wasn't denying that. First of all Frank, if I had been talking about the TYD, I would have said so. What I am talking about (again) is “custodial” rights. Again Frank, if the unmarried father has the same “rights” as the unmarried mother, why does he have to petition the court for custody and parenting time? "otherwise, why would the father have to file for 'custody' and 'parenting time'?" Technically they BOTH do, but again, I am talking about legalities not realities. The mother has all sorts of advantages as far as establishing custody in these situations, but the law isn't one of them. Why is it USUALLY the father who has to file? Because generally it is the mother who is in physical possession. Also because the mother can claim that he isn't the father and stall things until he gets a paternity test. ”Technically” she does NOT…and it has nothing to do with “possession”. Remember Frank, we’re talking about unmarried parents, not married parents.