Non finnish family lawyer

[Tiwaz]

Lawyer will ask same things we have.

Is child born inside wedlock?
Yes: Husband of mother is automatically father. If father is someone else but husband, he can confess fatherhood, but it has to be accepted by both mother and her husband. Not a thing you can do about it.
No: Father must be determined. However! Mother can refuse to have parenthood investigated and that's it. Not a thing you can do about it.
Man can confess to be father of the child in simple procedure of interview. If man refuses, he can be taken to court. And most likely have to submit laboratory sample for confirming fatherhood.

[SteveO23]

Hi Steve,


Are you in Helsinki? This is one office that has services in english and I can recommend:
http://www.tinyurl.com/asianais

Hi,

Thanks for the reply.

I'm actually based in the UK, but my child has just been born in Finland (Espoo).

Steve

Inside or outside marriage?

Hi, we are not, & have not been, married.

[rinso]

Hi, we are not, & have not been, married.

No: Father must be determined. However! Mother can refuse to have parenthood investigated and that's it. Not a thing you can do about it.

So if the mother is making problems for you, the situation looks bad.
A lawyer cannot do much about it. If he tries, the mother probably will switch into defensive mode and you're out on a limb.
Try every other option first before you threaten with a lawyer.

[brendanuk]

Using lawyer is not a threat. If Mother is threaten by thought of her ex getting legal advise, then even more reason to get it.

People being reasonable arent threatened by lawyers or courts

[Tiwaz]

Using lawyer is not a threat. If Mother is threaten by thought of her ex getting legal advise, then even more reason to get it.

People being reasonable arent threatened by lawyers or courts

There is nothing that lawyer can do! If mother tells the officials that she does not want father to be investigated, they will fill the line "Unknown" and absolutely nothing will change that.

You could line up 20 000 lawyers to siege office building and the officials will not budge. Court will not take into hearing demand to have mother forced to investigate fatherhood of OP and so forth.

Lawyer can do nothing if she decides she does not want him as father of her child. His only hope is to convince her directly.

[rinso]

Using lawyer is not a threat. If Mother is threaten by thought of her ex getting legal advise, then even more reason to get it.

People being reasonable arent threatened by lawyers or courts

Sending a lawyer in means "we are going to do it by the book, no longer mister nice guy".
People become afraid to make mistakes and give up some of their rights.
Response is a defensive attitude where all requests are met with suspicion.
And if one party uses a lawyer, the other often feels forced to hire one themselves.
Forcing people to spent money doesn't make them happy and cooperative.

[Rip]

L
No: Father must be determined. However! Mother can refuse to have parenthood investigated and that's it. Not a thing you can do about it.

Regarding unmarried mothers this is not quite right:
Section 16 of the paternity act refers explicitly to children born in wedlock only:
http://www.finlex.fi/fi/laki/kaannokset ... 750700.pdf

Additional bits from a web page of one legal office:
http://www.asianajotoimisto.com/pkon+as ... ustaminen/

Jos äiti kirjallisesti vastustaa isyyden selvittämistä, lastenvalvoja voi jatkaa selvitystä ainoastaan, jos mies, joka katsoo olevansa lapsen isä, on tunnustanut isyytensä ja haluaa isyytensä selvitettäväksi.

Isyyden vahvistaminen ei edellytä, että lapsen äiti hyväksyy tunnustamisen.

And from our Minister of Justice:

Isyyslain mukaan äidillä ja miehellä on yhtäläiset
mahdollisuudet vaikuttaa siihen, että isyys
avioliiton ulkopuolella syntyneeseen lapseen
nähden vahvistetaan. Isyys voidaan isyyslain 15
§:n 4 momentin mukaan tunnustaa milloin tahansa
lapsen syntymän jälkeen. Lain 8 §:n mukaan
äiti voi kirjallisesti vastustaa isyyden selvittämistä,
jos lapsi on hänen huollossaan tai hoidettavanaan.
Äidin vastustus ei kuitenkaan estä isyyden
selvittämistä, jos mies, joka katsoo olevansa lapsen
isä, on tunnustanut lapsen. Tunnustamalla
lapsen mies saa siten aina isyyden selvittämisen
jatkumaan äidin tahdosta riippumatta.

http://www.parliament.fi/triphome/bin/t ... E}=PDF.pdf

- on the other hand I'm not sure what in practical terms one would gain from such a recognition. Visitation rights do not automatically follow...

[Upphew]

Additional bits from a web page of one legal office:
http://www.asianajotoimisto.com/pkon+as ... ustaminen/

Jos äiti kirjallisesti vastustaa isyyden selvittämistä, lastenvalvoja voi jatkaa selvitystä ainoastaan, jos mies, joka katsoo olevansa lapsen isä, on tunnustanut isyytensä ja haluaa isyytensä selvitettäväksi.

Isyyden vahvistaminen ei edellytä, että lapsen äiti hyväksyy tunnustamisen.

From that link:
"Isyyttä selvittäessään lastenvalvojan on hankittava isyyden vahvistamista varten tarpeelliset tiedot lapsen äidiltä sekä muilta henkilöiltä, jotka voivat antaa tietoja isyyttä koskevista seikoista. Lastenvalvoja neuvottelee asiasta ainakin isäksi ehdolla olevan miehen kanssa. Myös veritutkimukset ovat mahdollisia. Lastenvalvojalla ei kuitenkaan ole käytettävissään pakkokeinoja. "
So it is he said - she said and officials have no teeth.

- on the other hand I'm not sure what in practical terms one would gain from such a recognition. Visitation rights do not automatically follow...

Maintenance liability does follow automatically?

[Rip]

Lastenvalvojalla ei kuitenkaan ole käytettävissään pakkokeinoja. "
So it is he said - she said and officials have no teeth.

Legally binding court decisions about paternity were made before DNA was even discovered. One case that went to supreme court confirming the right of a father to have paternity established when the mother wished not to co-operate: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/oikeus/kko/kko/1995/19950057

(Importantly, the mother was unmarried at the time)

- on the other hand I'm not sure what in practical terms one would gain from such a recognition. Visitation rights do not automatically follow...

Maintenance liability does follow automatically?

Even that must require a separate decision but objection of one of the parents would have far less effect...

[Upphew]

Lastenvalvojalla ei kuitenkaan ole käytettävissään pakkokeinoja. "
So it is he said - she said and officials have no teeth.

Legally binding court decisions about paternity were made before DNA was even discovered. One case that went to supreme court confirming the right of a father to have paternity established when the mother wished not to co-operate: http://www.finlex.fi/fi/oikeus/kko/kko/1995/19950057

(Importantly, the mother was unmarried at the time)

If I read that decision right, the court of appeal decided to establish the fatherhood, mother appealed to supreme court and they decided that there were no basis to reverse the decision of lower court. But one member of supreme court disagreed with their decision and: "Sen vuoksi puran ja poistan hakemuksessa tarkoitetun päätöksen sekä palautan asian Turun käräjäoikeuteen asianomaisen tuomarin uudelleen käsiteltäväksi."

So was the case redone in appeal court or not?

[Rip]

Majority rules despite the custom that the minority opinions are not written in conditional form (so the judge writes 'I do' instead of 'I would')

[rinso]

Maintenance liability does follow automatically?

Maybe not automatically, but there is a good chance requests from the mother will be granted (indeed after an other legal battle)

Lets assume he can establish parenthood against the wishes of the mother. Then he has to start fighting for visiting rights.
(they are viewed from the perspective of the child, not the father)
Since BrendanUK lives outside Finland, the best he can hope for is one or two visits per year to his child in Finland. And if the mother is making trouble, he has to fight over every visit.