Maybe I'm stupid, or naive, or old-fashioned ... or an old.

All my life, I thought that one of the main purposes of a birth certificate was to document who a child's parents are. I mean their biological parents, not the adoptive parents, or whatever family arrangement exists. Family history is important, if for no other reason than having knowledge of medical conditions. I'd always assumed that the only time you omitted a fathers name on a birth certificate was when the mother truly didn't know who the dad was.

But in this last year at school, particularly working in the legal aid clinics, I've come to find that a significant percentage of lower income women deliberately omit the father from the birth certificate because they don't want to jeopardize their welfare benefits. When I say "welfare", I'm including section 8 housing, WIC, earned income tax credits - ALL unearned government benefits.

One scenario I've encountered: Client is trying to prove that his/her younger relatives are really related to them - niece/nephew, grandchild, whatever - to claim them as dependents on their tax return, or to claim custody when the mother is in jail. But, because one or more birth certificates in the family tree don't list a father at all, it's almost impossible to prove that the kids area really related to the client. Yes, it can be done, but it's difficult.

Another scenario: Man & woman living together, but don't get married, and they have one or more children together. Later, they split up, and mom wants to sue dad for child support. The birth certificates don't show a father at all, and when I inquire as to why, the answer was that she got a bigger housing check as a single mom. If the dad could be identified on the birth records, the housing authority would count his income and assets in determining eligibility and payments for the family. Now, when mom wants child support, the mom has to get DNA testing and a court paternity order done to prove parentage.

The last one that made me shake my head: two women listed as parents on a birth certificate. No father. The women split up, and now the biological mother wants child support from the father ...

I've known people who never knew who their biological parents were, and found out later in life. Some got to meet their mother and/or father. Sometimes there was a connection, and sometimes there wasn't. But at least the individuals had the satisfaction of knowing. And of course, it helps to have that family medical history when you're facing unusual symptoms ... like, "does your family have a history of cancer"?

But the big thing to me is that the welfare system is actively breaking down the importance of family, all for the sake of qualifying for more benefits. I'd never realized before this just how direct the effect was. Yes, I said I'm stupid.

Oh, and my favorite case scenario, from the mother: "I need help filing for a divorce".

I asked her whether this would be agreed or contested, and whether they had children together ... it matters because you have to file differently for each situation. Her answer was that she and her husband didn't have children together.

But she does have children (note the plural).

Who were born during the marriage.

And the birth certificates do not list a father.

And she stated that her husband was not the father of the kids.

Upon inquiry as to the circumstances, the response was that omitting the fathers meant that the various welfare agencies could not make the dads pay child support, and therefore the mothers cash benefits were increased ... and now husband does not want to be responsible for paying child support on her kids ... and at this point I'm looking for a two by four to hit myself in the head with. Cause I have no idea whether husband is really the dad or not ... and you have to have the facts correct in order to file the case correctly .... ACK!

I spent a few hours in Social Security Office in Ft Lauderdale years ago getting a new card and watched a young lady come out of her meeting with officials and whisper "tell them you don't know who your father was." I don't know the full context of what she was there for but this tidbit of information went through the whole waiting room of at least 50 people in a matter of seconds and really excited a few of them that must have been there for the same reason. I've always wondered what they were there for because I would have bet my life they were all scamming the system for something.

Seems like the people who know the welfare game, know how to play it well.

The more kids you have and the less work you do seems to get your more benefits.

It's a backwards system that some spend many years playing the game.......

And I will guarantee there are plenty of folks on the inside that are happy to help you fill out the paperwork properly.

I�ve had guys quit working (as in stop showing up, not turn in a 2 weeks notice) once they realized that they were getting too many hours, and their paycheck would prevent them from getting a full welfare check once the welfare office found out. This isn�t a once or twice event. It�s probably happened 20 times over the years.

Should be no benefits if there is no father.

Probably the best birth control we could come up with.

For sure. Not listing the father = zero benefits.

The Great Society.

Thank you LBJ and the Democrats

free birth control in ALL high schools would help. Might cost now but way less expensive down the road! Believe me, I teach at a 75% free lunch school.

BTW I wouldn�t even consider working at an effluent school.

Affluent

In this case, they might be synonymous.

mm

My birth certificate has my step dads name on it