First off, a father does not have the right to give up parental rights without the permission of the courts, and the mother, provided that the mother is not now, nor will later, have the children on AFDC. Welfare has the power to override, retroactively.
If the court approves the removal of your parental rights, than you're not responsible financially. Morally it a separate issue. You need to read this book:
----
She can consent to a court ordered guardianship if she has sole custody and the father has no parental rights. If the father has any parental rights he must also consent.She can consent to a court ordered guardianship if she has sole custody and the father has no parental rights. If the father has any parental rights he must also consent.She can consent to a court ordered guardianship if she has sole custody and the father has no parental rights. If the father has any parental rights he must also consent.She can consent to a court ordered guardianship if she has sole custody and the father has no parental rights. If the father has any parental rights he must also consent.
Single fathers have no parental rights until court ordered. A glass ceiling scenario, only the fathers are relegated to the subbasement of equal rights.
An ordered tree is a tree that has the children of each node ordered in a certain manner. When the root is shown at top, the children are written from left to right.
Yes, the revocation of parental rights does not exclude the parent from being financially responsible until the child or children reach the age of emancipation, or the age ordered in the child support petition.
Termination of parental rights does not terminate child support until/unless the child is adopted. At that time, the biological parent still owes whatever he had been ordered to pay and has not paid.
Consult the laws in the state in which you reside that pertain to parental responsibility. Each state has specific TPR guidelines that a parent must meet before they are allowed to voluntarily reliquish parental rights. Even if the criteria is met the final decision is determined by the presiding judge. If the person is allowed to relinquish their parental rights, they are no longer responsible to financially support the child/children. They also have no rights of visitation, decision making or anything that might relate to the child or children. In addition, a parent cannot be forced to give up their rights to their biological child/children. It is either a voluntary action or the court permanently terminates parental rights due to neglect and/or abuse of the minor child or children. *That is not always true. Each state is different and a lot of states require the parent that is relinquishing rights to continue to pay child support unless the child is being adopted. If it was that easy every dead beat parent would try to relinquish their rights just so they didn't have to pay
Just my opinion. I believe that if there is no court ordered parental custody or neither parent has filed for total custodym then either parent has the right to the child until otherwise ordered by a judge.
No. While some states do have grandparents' rights with respect to visitation of their grandchildren, they have NO ability to affect their own children's exercising of their parental rights. So, in this question, only the son has the legal ability to relinquish his own parental rights, and cannot be stopped from relinquishing those rights by his own parents (the grandparents). This presumes the son hasn't been declared mentally incompetent, and there isn't some court-ordered guardianship of the son.
Not without the children, or being ordered to by the court.
I say the child could unless if its court ordered that he or she cant
24
If the children had gone to the assembly place as ordered, they would have been accounted for and safely evacuated from the premises in case of an emergency. By following the directive, they would have ensured their own safety and made it easier for authorities to locate and protect them.