Family Law: The court's interpretation of parental responsibility for fathers focuses more on fathe

Authors Avatar

Family Law: The court's interpretation of parental responsibility for fathers focuses more on fathe

The notion that there is a conflict, for if we suggest a focus we suggest imbalance, between a fathers' rights and a child's needs this is only a recent phenomenon. Historically the fathers rights prevailed, here we speak only of married fathers, and it was not until this century that women began to reverse the imbalance of control. As mothers are often the primary carer then perhaps the child's needs are often entangled with those of the mother. However the law now seems now to place a greater emphasis on the children's needs hence the child's welfare is "...the court's paramount consideration". The idea that there is any conflict at all was questioned by Lord Frazer "...parental rights...do not exist for the benefit of the parents. They exist for the benefit of the child...". Eekelaar emphasises that rights, now parental responsibility, are, in Lord Frazer's notion, only duties towards the child. He defines these duties as the role provided by the parent. He, however, sees responsibilities with two different meanings. We will concentrate on his first interpretation where parental responsibility is "...taking care of the child, providing for his education, maintenance, legal representation and the administration of his property".

        Father's can take three distinct forms, the married father who enjoys equal parental responsibility with the mother, the divorced or separated father who still retains parental responsibility but loses much of the control and the unmarried father who only gains parental responsibility by agreement or a court order. These "rights and duties" of parental responsibility are confered by the Children Act. It may be, however, not the Children Acts but the Child Support Act that is increasing the number of fathers who seek parental responsibility or become actively involved with the child. There is a notion that those fathers either separated or unmarried have to provide financially for their children so they should therefore be allowed a say in how that money is spent and derive some benefit from it in the form of contact with the child. Deech describes this as "...value for money..." which she suggests is unreasonable. With the advent of DNA testing becoming more competent at identifying fathers and the Child Support Act overturning clean breaks it is not unnatural for the father to want some say in how his money is spent. Whether this benefits the child is dependant on the motivation of the father.

Join now!

        Parental responsibility is often granted to fathers to confirm the commitment by a father. Deech refers to the US Supreme Court where unmarried fathers personal contacts are preserved by the Due Process Clause only if there is commitment shown, "...a mere existence of biological links does not merit...protection". In the English courts there is also a suggestion that parental responsibility is almost an automatic right. In Re S an unmarried father who had a conviction for receiving paedophilic photos of young girls was granted parental responsibility. Ward LJ. Gave two reasons for his willingness to grant parental responsibility, first that ...

This is a preview of the whole essay