I have witnessed cases in Nigeria. Traditionally the child of an unwed mother belonGs to the woman. She has a right to choose the father. Secondly getting a record of the fact that she as asked to abort the child will kick the case outta the courts.


I alays advise, keep records, emails, text messaged, phone convos. You will surely get something the court will admit.

Sisi_Kill:
Remember though, the case will never get that far unless he has taken all the necessary steps to establish paternity.

the fact that a person can prove that he is the biological father does not automatically mean he is deemed fit to be a guardian of the child. his absence rather can prove that he is irresponsible and the fact that he requested the woman to abort previously can show that, "if he could be negligent and reckless by making such a request, he cannot possibly be entrusted with the human life of someone he wanted terminated before"

mondi_cheeks:
the fact that a person can prove that he is the biological father does not automatically mean he is deemed fit to be a guardian of the child. his absence rather can prove that he is irresponsible and the fact that he requested the woman to abort previously can show that, "if he could be negligent and reckless by making such a request, he cannot possibly be entrusted with the human life of someone he wanted terminated before"

feck's sake.....
what else does he need to prove? if he's sane and well to do and he does not pose any harm to himself or the child, there's no law that would prohibit a biological father from getting access to his child

you keep quoting idiotic constitutions - somewhere in that same constitution, it's unlawful to rob people with arms. as i am speaking to you right now, hundreds of families are being robbed. so what is the essence of quoting constitution when it's not enforced?

coogar:
feck's sake.....
what else does he need to prove? if he's sane and well to do and he does not pose any harm to himself or the child, there's no law that would prohibit a biological father from getting access to his child

he wanted the same child to be aborted before and somehow that doesnt pose as harm on that child are u freakin' serious!!!

coogar:
you keep quoting idiotic constitutions - somewhere in that same constitution, it's unlawful to rob people with arms. as i am speaking to you right now, hundreds of families are being robbed. so what is the essence of quoting constitution when it's not enforced?

well u thinking the Sharia Law is constitutional in the first place is absurd!

mondi_cheeks:
he wanted the same child to be aborted before and somehow that doesnt pose as harm on that child are u freakin' serious!!!

is he the doctor that would perform the abortion or what exactly are you talking about? let me open your eyes cos your sheer naivety is starting to peeve me......

ARE OUR CHILD CUSTODY LAWS UP TO DATE?

Lagos — When Asabe left her husband for her father's house with her eighteen-month-old son, she did not realise that leaving her marriage meant she would have to give up her baby.

One late afternoon, a few days after she left, her mother-in-law came to visit. After the usual pleasantries, and as she held her grandson in her arms, Asabe's mother-in-law informed her that it was okay for her to leave her husband, but she could not take their son away. She walked out the door with the baby and it was many years before Asabe would see her son again.

In March, hidden away on the pages of a little known newspaper was a story of a Nigerian woman who died while struggling to retain physical possession of her four year old son. According to eyewitnesses, the child cried as both parents tugged at him, until the father won with one final push and walked away with the child and the woman's life. This couple had four children, two had died and the husband had possession of the third.

How many women in Nigeria have illegally lost possession of their children just because their marriages have ended either by them or for them? How many of these cases are ever reported? And in how many of these cases, even when civil and customary laws dictate that these children are better off with their mothers, does the legal system support this?

The Matrimonial Causes Act 1970 is applicable to all child custody cases including children borne out of civil, customary and Islamic marriages and provides that in all custody matters, 'the interests of the child shall be paramount'. This predominance of the child's right is also echoed in the Child Rights Act 2003, but how do we decide in a patriarchal society what the 'interest of the child' is, especially when that child is a minor? This becomes even harder when the Matrimonial Act is silent on what the interests of a child are, does not define the word 'minor' nor take into consideration the special treatment that minors need.

So who gets custody of the child where both parents are fit, willing and capable?

In Nigerian case law, we see the uncertainty in the judgments as judges struggle to decide what is in the best interest of a child subject to custody proceedings. For Justice Belgore, JSC (as he then was) in Odogwu v Odogwu, 'the welfare of the child is not in material provisions of the home such as food and air conditioners it is psychologically detrimental to his (the child) welfare and ultimate

happiness and psychological development if maternal care, is denied him'. In Williams v Williams, Learned Trial Judge Williams said 'the best arrangement for the welfare of any child is that he or she should be with his or her parents'. Neither of these analyses support a situation where minors are taken away from their mothers if they are not unfit - so why is it that in Nigeria, women lose custody of their infant or under aged children even when courts provide them with sole or joint custody? Most importantly, why in the 21st century is this data unavailable from our courts?

This is where Islamic jurisprudence is more detailed because the injunctions are so clear that the flagrant disregard for the law amongst Muslims and Sharia courts is testament to how heavily the culture of patriarchy is. However, and this is a big however, the clarity ends when the different schools of interpretation are taken into consideration. Under Maliki Islamic jurisprudence, which is what majority of Nigerian Muslims adhere to, children under the age of puberty stay with their mother. In fact, female children stay with their mother until the time of marriage while male children stay with their mothers until puberty. Going further in attesting to the importance of the mother in a child's life, even when a Muslim woman cannot be granted custody, seven variations of custody lie with her family before the father's family comes into the equation - again something that rarely happens.

Apart from our culture of supreme patriarchy, the other reasons why women lose possession of their children is because they are economically disempowered and lack access to information about their rights under either customary (Islamic) or civil law.

Unfortunately there is little under Igbo and Yoruba customary law that supports a mother's right to her children. Amongst the Yoruba the children belong with the father and custody will usually be granted to him. According to research, within a certain group of the Yoruba, the paternal grandmother names the children, setting the stage for 'ownership' of the children. Ironically, in a society where all the failings of a child are 'blamed' on the mother, a tacit admission of the importance of the role, our society insists on separating young children from their mothers.

With thirty seven 'Ministries of Women's Affairs' and countless Non Governmental Organisations all focused on promoting the welfare of women and children, information on child custody issues and where to go for help and advice is sadly lacking. Baobab, a women's human rights organisation, has some relevant information but this is hidden inside annual reports and there is no information on the website on the legal position on child custody. Collating custody cases and judgments is the ideal place for law, data and public policy to merge; with the judiciary and NGOs' feeding the information into the Ministries and the Ministries using this data to ensure the right policy is implemented.

As usual, the Nigerian legal and political system is not set up to protect the rights of women and children. We missed the opportunity to use the Child Rights Act to close the gaps in the Matrimonial Causes Act. Now women, not only in the judiciary and legal profession, must begin taking collective and individual responsibility for protecting one of the most fundamental rights of a child - the right to a mother's love.

http://allafrica.com/stories/200909150864.html?maneref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.uk%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dfather%2Bclaims%2Bchild%2Bownership%2Bin%2Bnigeria%26sourceid%3Dchrome-mobile%26ie%3DUTF-8&mstac=0


i rest my case......

mondi_cheeks: this is not in anyway sentimental according to u? remember a court cannot move away froms facts in issue(a sworn affidavit,which was signed by someone who had the capacity to appreciate the consequences of his actions and continued to act upon such appreciation) and base their decision on such a flimsy closing argument by a legal representative. if a man claims that he didnt sign the affidavit, dont forget that he has to prove it before the court can consider the document irrelevant. you might be forgetting that 'documentary evidence' falls under the best-evidence rule, the court cannot find it to be inadmissible because someone simply said "i didnt sign it".

Okay I see you modified your post!

Can we back up a bit here because you to have missed the plot.

1) As long as they are not married, the father has no rights.

2) As an unwed mother, the woman has the rights to make legal decision for her child.

3) OP's friend can marry the woman and adopt the child.

4) The biological father can't just waltz back in to claim the child leaving OP's friend in the cold (OP's fears for his friend)

5) If he wants his child he has go through some heavy legal wranglings. In doing this, it would put him in a perfect position for the woman to claim what's due to her.

. . . .there can be only two clear outcome from this, the man realizing what he has to go through and what he may have to pay, abandons his quest OR he does go through with it putting himself in a position where she can sue him.

Your thinking that his Suggestion of abortion the best hand they can play is wrong because it can be easily argued away... affidavit or no affidavit.

That'a my point, that has been my point from the very beginning and if you weren't so sentimental about this abortion issue, you would see that there is a stronger leg to stand on.

^^^
in the nigeria i know, the father of a child is the father of a child - wedding or no wedding.....that's what our custom and tradition believe - the judiciary system is so poor nothing reasonable would come out of it - it's the survival of the richest or who can bribe more. if i impregnate any woman now and disappear into the thin air in nigeria, that child is mine anytime i decide to find him/her.......that's the reality, people!

Sisi_Kill:
Your thinking that his Suggestion of abortion the best hand they can play is wrong because it can be easily argued away... affidavit or no affidavit.

how can it be easily argued away when it proves to be potential danger on the child?

mondi_cheeks: how can it be easily argued away when it proves to be potential danger on the child?

abortion is not murder.....
because the man said she should get rid of the foetus does not mean he would kill the child after birth. are you really suggesting the abortion technicality would stand in court?

coogar: ^^^
in the nigeria i know, the father of a child is the father of a child - wedding or no wedding.....that's what our custom and tradition believe - the judiciary system is so poor nothing reasonable would come out of it - it's the survival of the richest or who can bribe more. if i impregnate any woman now and disappear into the thin air in nigeria, that child is mine anytime i decide to find him/her.......that's the reality, people!

Not so true sir. I have had personal experience. Its all abt information. In my own place the unwed mothers family owns the child. When she marries, anyman who pays her bride price takes the child with him unless the man refuses.


The courts are very grey on this and like u said bribery is usually the ay forward.

kitty kat:
Not so true sir. I have had personal experience. Its all abt information. In my own place the unwed mothers family owns the child. When she marries, anyman who pays her bride price takes the child with him unless the man refuses.

The courts are very grey on this and like u said bribery is usually the ay forward.

anyman who marries her inherits my own blood? in nigeria?
somebody wake me i am dreaming ....... the same nigeria with green and white flag? dem never born the woman!!! hell - not in my lifetime!

coogar:

abortion is not murder.....
because the man said she should get rid of the foetus does not mean he would kill the child after birth. are you really suggesting the abortion technicality would stand in court?

using the reasonable person test you can safely say, some one who requested for the termination of pregnancy...because he did not want the child in the first place, should later on be entrusted with the life of the same person even though the decision he made prior proves potential threat on the well being of the child. did u even consider the best interests of the child?
simply because others have gotten away with it in Nigeria does not make it right neither does it make it acceptable for people to put the law in their hands.

coogar:

anyman who marries her inherits my own blood? in nigeria?
somebody wake me i am dreaming ....... the same nigeria with green and white flag? dem never born the woman!!! hell - not in my lifetime!

Yes sir na so. In this same Naija for life. Meet ppl with real life experience. Come offline and I will gist u and show u examples.

coogar:

anyman who marries her inherits my own blood? in nigeria?
somebody wake me i am dreaming ....... the same nigeria with green and white flag? dem never born the woman!!! hell - not in my lifetime!

perfectly explaining why Nigeria has such a "great economy" with mentalities like these u cannot possibly expect a country to improve in anyway. if a man cannot take responsibility of his own child(1 person), it would just be straight up stupid to expect him to run a country wit 150 million other people and succeed with it

kitty kat:

Yes sir na so. In this same Naija for life. Meet ppl with real life experience. Come offline and I will gist u and show u examples.

i don't disagree some men might have lost the custody of their kids to another man - there are 2 kinds of people in the world - the wise ones and the foolish ones. sadly, that's the world will live in. however, i cannot see how a well to do man who is financially buoyant to take care of his child would be denied access to his own child just because he was a philandering teenage boy who was immature to deal with paternity........

are we talking about the same patriarchal nigeria? the same nigerian where the successful child is the father's and the wayward irresponsible child belongs to the mother? i think some of you posters are getting carried away with the western culture...i won't even take custody of another man's child no matter how bad the woman tries to paint the father of the child! you can only take the wife of a lazy man - you cannot take his kid!

mondi_cheeks: perfectly explaining why Nigeria has such a "great economy" with mentalities like these u cannot possibly expect a country to improve in anyway. if a man cannot take responsibility of his own child(1 person), it would just be straight up stupid to expect him to run a country wit 150 million other people and succeed with it

abeg go n siddon with your karl marx philosophy!
other islamic countries operate a patriarchal society and they are doing very well - if you think our custom is the reason the politicians are looting then you need to go back to school! our development or lack of it has nothing to do with the custom!

mondi_cheeks:
the fact that a person can prove that he is the biological father does not automatically mean he is deemed fit to be a guardian of the child. his absence rather can prove that he is irresponsible and the fact that he requested the woman to abort previously can show that, "if he could be negligent and reckless by making such a request, he cannot possibly be entrusted with the human life of someone he wanted terminated before"

One again, this part of my post musta flown right past your head

The only reason Biological daddy will be turned away is if he not legally fit to be a parent but if he has everything going well for him. . .shooo affiwhatnow?.

Seriously, you need to calm down! You are shooting from the hip here with your emotional outbursts.

You can't bank on the fact that because something offends your moral senses a great deal, it will surely do the same to other people. To you, the biological father's suggestion of abortion should totally discount him the running but can you guarantee other people will see it the way you do? NO!! Which is why it makes better sense to fight with established laws.

Jeez! Abeg, if you are a lawyer, I am begging you to please go learn how to put sentiment aside and approach things in a more logical manner. You also need to understand that going into court with an win all or nothing mentality is a sure fire to lose more. Life isn't black or white, people don't always suffer the consequences of their actions while others get splattered with consequences shite for something they had no hand in.

In life concessions are made and sometimes the only option available to you as a lawyer is not winning but making your clients loss less than what it could have been and the only way to do that is to check your emotions at the door!!

I'm done with you jare, argue with Coogar. . .he is better at dealing with emotions than I am.

Coogar u r just being a partriachal Naija man. You have never experienced this so just stop being theoretical. I told u to come offline and get real life gist.

kitty kat: Coogar u r just being a partriachal Naija man. You have never experienced this so just stop being theoretical. I told u to come offline and get real life gist.

sadly, i am not but i know what gives in nigeria....
i do all house chores in my house - my wife is the supreme ruler in my home.....she has absolute power to rule or divide! it's her world down here but that role changes immediately the pilot announces we have touched down in lagos!

which real life gist have you got that i have never heard of?

what emotional outbursts...he didnt maintain the child from birth, he did not give the necessary care a
father is required to give a child, he never played the role of the father right from the child's birth, he didnt contribute to the upbringing and well being of the child, he never met the needs of the child financially and emotionally...now explain how he can possibly be deemed legally fit, if he never met the BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD (which are in question by the way) right from birth?

mondi_cheeks: using the reasonable person test you can safely say, some one who requested for the termination of pregnancy...because he did not want the child in the first place, should later on be entrusted with the life of the same person even though the decision he made prior proves potential threat on the well being of the child. did u even consider the best interests of the child?
simply because others have gotten away with it in Nigeria does not make it right neither does it make it acceptable for people to put the law in their hands.

SMDH!!!

mondi_cheeks: what emotional outbursts...he didnt maintain the child from birth, he did not give the necessary care a
father is required to give a child, he never played the role of the father right from the child's birth, he didnt contribute to the upbringing of the child...now explain how he can possibly be deemed legally fit, if he never met the BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD right from birth?

Ah! Okay, I see you are not reading my posts.

Whew! The reason for confusion now makes sense.

mondi_cheeks: what emotional outbursts...he didnt maintain the child from birth, he did not give the necessary care a
father is required to give a child, he never played the role of the father right from the child's birth, he didnt contribute to the upbringing of the child...now explain how he can possibly be deemed legally fit, if he never met the BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD right from birth?

he was not around - simple!
it's a different case if he was around and neglected the child - this man was simply absent! he might be asked to pay some money as compensation to the single mother but he would be given access to his child! i can argue that till kingdom come unless this man has a poor criminal history of being a child molester/pedöphile or he is registered as a sex offender!

I did rather not talk abt it here. But well to do men do loose custody wen they really bleep up. Lemme tell u one. It happened to close friend of mine. The aunt was Unmarried and was rejected by the man. The woman left and had a boy. She later got married to man in the states ho adopted the boy legally. 30somethin yrs later. Bio-dad comes calling cos he has only 2 gels. Anyways his rejected son is now a medical doctor in the US. He went to her family and they told her the son belongs to the husband. He ent to court and they told him his son is old enough to choose.

Hat do u think the son did? Ironically he is the only son of his foster dad. He kicked his dad in the face and told him to go to hell. The man met his son and the son clearly told him that his only allegiance is to his foster dad and mom he abandoned. Its not nolly wood. Its real life.

I have others that are more complicated but wouldn't want to talk abt them on NLD.

coogar:

he was not around - simple!
it's a different case if he was around and neglected the child - this man was simply absent! he might be asked to pay some money as compensation to the single mother but he would be given access to his child! i can argue that till kingdom come unless this man has a poor criminal history of being a child molester/pedöphile or he is registered as a sex offender!

neglect can be proven right from his knowledge of the existance of the unborn. if he had not known that the woman was pregnant only then would his absence be acceptable, but where he had knownledge right from conception, it clearly proves negligence!!! personal circumstances of the father are considered only after it has been proven that he met the best interests of the child right from birth. the legal question in every case with regards to custody, is to prove whether the best interests of the child have been met. it would be very stupid to think that the best interests of the child will be superseded by the father's personal circumstances

definition of child neglect:- an ACT or OMISSION that results in the harm or THREATENS TO CAUSE HARM to the child's health and WELFARE.

Sisi_Kill:
Ah! Okay, I see you are not reading my posts.
Whew! The reason for confusion now makes sense.

besides the fact that he is the biological father, is there anything else that he did that contributed to the welfare of the child that would make him deemed legally fit to have custody over the child right from birth until the time he makes the application?

mondi_cheeks: neglect can be proven right from his knowledge of the existance of the unborn. if he had not known that the woman was pregnant only then would his absence be acceptable, but where he had knownledge right from conception, it clearly proves negligence!!! personal circumstances of the father are considered only after it has been proven that he met the best interests of the child right from birth. the legal question in every case with regards to custody, is to prove whether the best interests of the child have been met. it would be very stupid to think that the best interests of the child will be superseded by the father's personal circumstances

if this is the case, what do you think the man would claim in court? that he was informed about the pregnancy? of course he would lie he never knew the woman got pregnant.....the court is about what you can prove not necessarily what the truth is unless there's a credible evidence. even in the face of evidence, temporary insanity is a sure getaway route! so my friend, the law can be toyed with in several ways....

kitty kat: I did rather not talk abt it here. But well to do men do loose custody wen they really bleep up. Lemme tell u one. It happened to close friend of mine. The aunt was Unmarried and was rejected by the man. The woman left and had a boy. She later got married to man in the states ho adopted the boy legally. 30somethin yrs later. Bio-dad comes calling cos he has only 2 gels. Anyways his rejected son is now a medical doctor in the US. He went to her family and they told her the son belongs to the husband. He ent to court and they told him his son is old enough to choose.

Hat do u think the son did? Ironically he is the only son of his foster dad. He kicked his dad in the face and told him to go to hell. The man met his son and the son clearly told him that his only allegiance is to his foster dad and mom he abandoned. Its not nolly wood. Its real life.

I have others that are more complicated but wouldn't want to talk abt them on NLD.

how is this example synonymous to what we have been saying?
new dad is american based - the laws of the land over there are strict and clear over child custody. the kid was even raised in america - where the normal naija custom and tradition does not exist! this is a different case entirely, miss kitty kat.....

gimme examples of where all the warring parties are all based in naija - with naija courts in play and with the kid raised in naija....then we can have a proper debate!

coogar:

if this is the case, what do you think the man would claim in court? that he was informed about the pregnancy? of course he would lie he never knew the woman got pregnant.....the court is about what you can prove not necessarily what the truth is unless there's a credible evidence. even in the face of evidence, temporary insanity is a sure getaway route! so my friend, the law can be toyed with in several ways....

after clearly being unable to prove ur case bona fide, u resort to perjury...this is pathetic

coogar:
how is this example synonymous to what we have been saying?
new dad is american based - the laws of the land over there are strict and clear over child custody. the kid was even raised in america - where the normal naija custom and tradition does not exist! this is a different case entirely, miss kitty kat.....

gimme examples of where all the warring parties are all based in naija - with naija courts in play and with the kid raised in naija....then we can have a proper debate!

so the case is irrelevant because justice prevailed

mondi_cheeks: after clearly being unable to prove ur case bona fide, u resort to perjury...this is pathetic

perjury?
for me to win any case in court - i have to lie, exaggerate, misappropriate the facts with loads of half-truths. the name of the game is winning!! if you think people who win cases in court didn't lie under the oath then you are even more naive than i once thought......

mondi_cheeks: so the case is irrelevant because justice prevailed

very irrelevant -
we are talking about what gives in "nigeria" - any analogy that does not centre around nigeria is null and avoid! it's like comparing domestic abuse in nigeria to america. a man would likely get punished for marital abuse in america, he won't even see a police station in nigeria not to talk of magistrate court..........no one is disputing what is right or wrong here, we are talking about how the nigerian judiciary deals with child custody!

coogar:

perjury?
for me to win any case in court - i have to lie, exaggerate, misappropriate the facts with loads of half-truths. the name of the game is winning!! if you think people who win cases in court didn't lie under the oath then you are even more naive than i once thought......

i dont see how bragging about being too weak to have the courage to battle a fair trial is in any way appealing