mysticwarrior:
A child that was given birth to as a bastard will always remain a bastard.

To his mother, he is not.

And to his father, he is bound to the child to the child, Unless

bukatyne:


I am not arguing the inheritance, I posted Nigerian laws on it.

Can an illegitimate child inherit? YES. (Dependent on the laws of the land).

Are illegitimate children stigmatized? In most places NO.

Does it change the fact children out of wedlock are illegitimate? NOPE!

I like your homosexual example: the fact homosexuality is mainstream, accepted and funky even doesn't change the fact they are homosexuals.

"Can an illegitimate child inherit? YES. (Dependent on the laws of the land)." He ought to after many Good Considerations.

"Does it change the fact children out of wedlock are illegitimate? NOPE!" (Wrong) This is not a Lawful Fact but a social designation and description, which itself is not founded on Good but for the purpose of stealing the property belonging to another and disenfranchising the proper person or persons.

Unnerve:


I get both of you.
It does seem like a contradiction and an irony, but drawing attention to the existence of illegitimacy does not denote "recognition" of it.

An illegitimate child is simply an English phrase meant to identify a person born to unmarried parents when contrasted with one (legitimate) who was born to married parents. It's a description, not an identity.

Do not fall for what they taught you there. That is the Lie.

All who said that shit thereafter stole the properties which they said "is just for description purposes". Those are same persons who became lords of manors, farms and other businesses while the True Heir passed away in poverty and in want.

Unnerve:

Where it gets tricky and the reason why the debate is strong among Nigerians is that the country is governed by multiple laws at multiple levels with many Nigerians switching allegiance & interpretation depending on the subject matter.

For instance, most customary laws remain very clear on illegitimacy and will not recognize a child born by such despite what common law dictates. There are also customary practices that tag a child born to a married woman outside her marriage as a bastard, but that born to a man by another woman besides his wife is not a bastard. There is also the very muddy water of inheritance, like where should an illegitimate child claim his/her inheritance, from the mother or from the father, etc.

In general and since the most important set of laws Nigeria abides by are those put forward and/or amended in the constitution, it is fair to say then that illegitimacy is simply not recognizable.

What is right and good is always clear but Nigerians are very lazy and weak in fighting for their rights and defending it.

Our people like things being given to them, even when it is theirs, rather than taking it.

etrange:


@ bolded: Nobody was born with a tag. The tag is whatever you and I put on them. And the person you quoted is saying we should stop these tagging. If you agree with me that nobody deserves to be discriminated based on circumstances surrounding their birth, then you must also agree the tagging should be done away with. It simply doesn't make sense.

@OP: Asking if a child should be "legitimate" after the parents eventually get married is ridiculous. People who answer no are even funnier. The question is, who changes the status? Where is it changed? Is there a paper work?

Let's collectively say no to social discrimination!

Sweet words, I am with You

coputa:
Yes,there are written and oral laws from different cultures. For example,the ibo culture does not recognise a child born out of wedlock,because such child does not share in the fathers estate

Lol @estate. I assume you you meant property in general.

Still the same story. The inheritance system you described, just like the labelling/tagging itself, is for people stuck in the archaic ways of life. Today, anybody (even strangers) can inherit anything from anyone provided a will is written. Even the Igbo traditions can't stand in the way of that. Gone are the days when kinsmen gather to distribute a dead person's wealth however they want (except the dead himself wasn't educated enough to know he needed a will or even rich enough to get a lawyer).

Traditions are good but they should be sustainable and progressive. Otherwise, it becomes a clog in the wheel.

Dtruthspeaker:


To his mother, he is not.

And to his father, he is bound to the child to the child, Unless

by law the child is a bastard.

mysticwarrior:
by law the child is a bastard.

No, he is not a bastard under Law, but it is you who is calling him a bastard and who desires for him to be so, called.

etrange:


Lol @estate. I assume you you meant property in general.

Still the same story. The inheritance system you described, just like the labelling/tagging itself, is for people stuck in the archaic ways of life. Today, anybody (even strangers) can inherit anything from anyone provided a will is written. Even the Igbo traditions can't stand in the way of that. Gone are the days when kinsmen gather to distribute a dead person's wealth however they want (except the dead himself wasn't educated enough to know he needed a will or even rich enough to get a lawyer).

Traditions are good but they should be sustainable and progressive. Otherwise, it becomes a clog in the wheel.

This is the enlightenment and the Law, Everything that is Good, Lasts Eternally or is supposed to last eternally.

So also Good Traditions Last Forever but there are also Bad Practices among the people and in Nigeria, those who suffer from these evil practices do not often properly resist them but they even rather submit themselves to it, then they come to complain about it everywhere and even disturb us with it, but they never do anything about it.

Dtruthspeaker:


This is the enlightenment and the Law, Everything that is Good, Lasts Eternally or is supposed to last eternally.

So also Good Traditions Last Forever but there are also Bad Practices among the people and in Nigeria, those who suffer from these evil practices do not often properly resist them but they even rather submit themselves to it, then they come to complain about it everywhere and even disturb us with it, but they never do anything about it.

Metathesiophobia (the fear of change) is real. Besides, nobody wants to challenge the norm so as not to be labelled abnormal. The desire for social acceptance is inherent in our nature and we would do anything to not be social misfits thus bending to the society even against our own will. Only a few can afford to be divergent. They are the "abnormal" ones that bring about change.

Why this plenty debate on the definition of the legitimatcy of a child?

Nigerian laws have even bent backwards and said upon marriage of the parents and/or the father's acknowledgement, the child becomes legitimate and/or can inherit.

Is this another agenda to normalize baby mamaism and papaism

etrange:


Metathesiophobia (the fear of change) is real. Besides, nobody wants to challenge the norm so as not to be labelled abnormal. The desire for social acceptance is inherent in our nature and we would do anything to not be social misfits thus bending to the society even against our own will. Only a few can afford to be divergent. They are the "abnormal" ones that bring about change.

Hence, the suffer continues for them and we also have to suffer their much complainings and their sordid tales of woes.

bukatyne:
Why this plenty debate on the definition of the legitimatcy of a child?

Is this another agenda to normalize baby mamaism and papaism

Nah!

But there is a Great influence against babymamas and their papas, which people are not aware of but they are labouring under it.

That is the Contract between babymama and the papa. This Contract can not be ignored, it is the same issue that arises when a prostitute gets pregnant.

coputa:
The Nigeria law recognises the legitimate and the illegitimate child.In section 42(2) of the 1999 nigeria constitution(as amended) conferred equal inheritance rights on the legitimate and illegitimate child, a distinction without any legal consequencies.The Igbo native law and custom which deprives children born out of wedlock from sharing/benefit of their father's estate is conflicting with section 42(2) of the 1999 constitution of the federal republic of nigeria(as amended)

So, this implies that so long as you aren't sired by an Igbo man or your child is not his. Legitimacy has no legal consequence for you. Got it.

Dtruthspeaker:


You are right that no child should be disinherited from his true parents possessions, simply because of lack of marriage or other unfounded grounds, but it is not sufficiently challenged in this country, hence wickedness prevails.

True

Dtruthspeaker:


No, he is not a bastard under Law, but it is you who is calling him a bastard and who desires for him to be so, called.

its still the same thing. In reality, a bastard according 2 him is same as an illegitimate child according 2 the law. Not like i like the word bastard

There are 2 sets if arguments on this thread. One set is arguing over legal descriptions the other is arguimg over what is nice, fair or right.

I think the OP was considering legal descriptions.


MrBrownJay1, Mindlog, I was enjoying your back and forth on this matter.

My question. If a man refuses to recognise the child born out of wedlock (making said child illegitimate) and the woman marries someone else who legally adopts the child, can the biological father come back into the picture? Demanding visitation rights or such? Especially before the child becomes 18?

Nigerian law. And any foreign laws too if you don't mind.

Liposure:
its still the same thing. In reality, a bastard according 2 him is same as an illegitimate child according 2 the law. Not like i like the word bastard

When you say "According to the Law" you are always saying it is Good and indisputably True, which is not True, in this instance.

For he can always call any person, both "legitimate" and "illegitimate", a "bastard" all day long, and we know that it is not in fact, True.

But when he says the Law said so, then some of us must contend with him.

LewsTherin:
There are 2 sets if arguments on this thread. One set is arguing over legal descriptions the other is arguimg over what is nice, fair or right.

I think the OP was considering legal descriptions.

MrBrownJay1, Mindlog, I was enjoying your back and forth on this matter.

My question. If a man refuses to recognise the child born out of wedlock (making said child illegitimate) and the woman marries someone else who legally adopts the child, can the biological father come back into the picture? Demanding visitation rights or such? Especially before the child becomes 18?

Nigerian law. And any foreign laws too if you don't mind.

First, recognition and legitimacy are not the same thing.

For in every instance where there is legitimacy, there must be a Recognition but, not all Recognition is Legitimacy and not all Legitimacy is Recognised, though, they all, ought to be.

That is the first part, therefore, "If a man refuses to recognise the child born out of wedlock (making said child illegitimate) [according to you]", he has simply exercised his own personal right to abdicate his natural responsibility, and if no one complains about it and compells him to take up his natural obligation, then everyone has to bear and suffer the consequences of his infraction, as a family unit and as a society, since they have acquiesced to his Neglect.

Therefore, the society and the family allow him to get away with it, while they all suffer for his Wrongdoing!

"and the woman marries someone else who legally adopts the child, can the biological father come back into the picture? Demanding visitation rights or such? Especially before the child becomes 18?"

See, that consequence in the beginning, which he thought to evade, comes into play here.

If he gets anything, it is his good fortune, but he definitely would have an uphill task.

LewsTherin:
There are 2 sets if arguments on this thread. One set is arguing over legal descriptions the other is arguimg over what is nice, fair or right.
I think the OP was considering legal descriptions.
MrBrownJay1, Mindlog, I was enjoying your back and forth on this matter.

My question. If a man refuses to recognise the child born out of wedlock (making said child illegitimate) and the woman marries someone else who legally adopts the child, can the biological father come back into the picture? Demanding visitation rights or such? Especially before the child becomes 18?

Nigerian law. And any foreign laws too if you don't mind.

there are many ways a man can come back to the picture, and possibly have visitation, but it would all depend on:
- whats best for the child
- who you are
- do you want an adoption reversal (very difficult)?
- do you just want your name on the birth certificate?

being recognized as the biological father isnt the hardest part here, changing the balance of that child's life is the main issue... as you can have visitation without being the legal guardian of that said child (like adoptive father).
nobody can stop a father from having his name on the birth certificate (even if some other dude has put his name on it before you), but you will have to go through some tough legal hoops to do that. but then again, whats next? visitation? shared/full custody? what does biological father wants exactly?

whatever his aim is, he will have to:
1st go to court to have his name on the birth certificate and/or remove the other dudes name from the birth certificate (if it is there). this can be very easy to do or a pain in the buttom...

2nd when his name is finally on the birth certificate, he should try to have a verbal agreement with mama as to how often he can see/be with his child.... if for whatever reason they cant agree on specifics then he will have to AGAIN, go through the court system and ask for shared custody of the child. a judge will now decide if he A) can have shared custody and B) how often he can see the child.

3rd if he wants full custody of the child, then he will have to bring serious accusations against mama and adoptive father (aka child's life is in danger bla bla bla) for him to have any chance of getting full custody of that said child.

MrBrownJay1:


there are many ways a man can come back to the picture, and possibly have visitation, but it would all.......

Hang on. Hypothetical situation here.

Guy gets girlfriend knocked up. Guy jumps bail and refuses to be responsible. No father's name is put on the birth certificate. 5 years later, girl meets new man, gets hitched. Man loves girl and child, he legally adopts the child. 10 years down, guy has a change of heart, finds girl and wants to be legitimise his child as his (who is already the legal child of Man). Can girl tell guy to fly a kite? Or does guy have any legal stool to stand on?

LewsTherin:


Hang on. Hypothetical situation here.

Guy gets girlfriend knocked up. Guy jumps bail and refuses to be responsible. No father's name is put on the birth certificate. 5 years later, girl meets new man, gets hitched. Man loves girl and child, he legally adopts the child. 10 years down, guy has a change of heart, finds girl and wants to be legitimise his child as his (who is already the legal child of Man). Can girl tell guy to fly a kite? Or does guy have any legal stool to stand on?

whatever the reason may be as to why a biological father left, a woman CANNOT deny you the right for your name to be on the birth certificate. a judge will ask for a DNA test to be done and if you are indeed the biological father, then your name will be added to the birth certificate....adopting a child will not add your name to the birth certificate. as soon as your name is on the birth certificate, you can now ask a judge to allow you visitation/custody etc...

just because you refused to be responsible for the child at birth and/or a woman remarries, does NOT mean you have relinquished your parental rights... and as much as an adoptive father will get parental rights over that child, depending on where you live, you can get your parental rights reinstated.

MrBrownJay1:


whatever the reason may be as to why a biological father left, a woman CANNOT deny you the right for your name to be on the birth certificate. a judge will ask for a DNA test to be done and if you are indeed the biological father, then your name will be added to the birth certificate....adopting a child will not add your name to the birth certificate. as soon as your name is on the birth certificate, you can now ask a judge to allow you visitation/custody etc...

just because you refused to be responsible for the child at birth and/or a woman remarries, does NOT mean you have relinquished your parental rights... and as much as an adoptive father will get parental rights over that child, depending on where you live, you can get your parental rights reinstated.

So a fella would have to officially relinquish his rights at some point before he can have nothing to do with the child further down the line, right?

LewsTherin:
So a fella would have to officially relinquish his rights at some point before he can have nothing to do with the child further down the line, right?

not so fast.... you have to remember that the most important thing here is the child's welfare. so if mama is unemployed and there is nobody new in her life to cater for the child's wellbeing, then you would still have to pay for child support to mama (even if you have relinquished your parental rights). in some country, they wouldnt even allow you to relinquish your parental rights unless there is already a new daddy present in the child's life.

if your name is not on the birth certificate, mama can have a judge force you to have a DNA test in order to pay for the child's upkeep... and therefore, even if you want to relinquish your parental rights, you would still have pay child support, until mama gets remarried (then you can ask a judge to review your child support payment)

Dtruthspeaker:


No, he is not a bastard under Law, but it is you who is calling him a bastard and who desires for him to be so, called.

no be me talk am o, another dictionary word for an illegitimate child is a "BASTARD". no be me write English dictionary so stop attacking me.

mysticwarrior:
no be me talk am o, another dictionary word for an illegitimate child is a "BASTARD". no be me write English dictionary so stop attacking me.

A child born out of wedlock is an illegitimate child and is also reffered to as a BASTARD.

MrBrownJay1:


A) its called ILLEGITIMATE child and/or bastard child... pls correct your above mistakes.
B) in true terms, whether parents get married afterwards or not, that child would still be considered illegitimate because at the time of his birth, his parents were not married
C) depending on which country you reside in, these "illegitimate" children wouldnt even have automatic right to inheritance, if the now married parents died without a will. they would have to petition for it, while legitimate children (born under marriage) wouldnt have to do that.

You better stop this your Igbo mentally, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is not fashioned after Igbo Customs and Traditiionj, rather it is fashioned after the British/American laws.

APCNig:
You better stop this your Igbo mentally, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is not fashioned after Igbo Customs and Traditiionj, rather it is fashioned after the British/American laws.

educate yourself (on that same foreign law you are talking about) so i dont have to do it for you
Igbo ko, Zgbo ni!