Posted on 03/14/2007 11:08:35 AM PDT by PercivalWalks
Behind the Anna Nicole Smith circus lies an important truth about fathers’ rights. The long line of opportunistic men who have lined up to be Smith’s baby’s dad since Smith’s death has diverted attention from the case’s key fact: photographer Larry Birkhead, Smith’s ex-boyfriend, has a legitimate claim to paternity. He has been thwarted for several months by the same legal maneuvers which are often employed to separate fathers from their children.
Long before Smith died and her estate became an issue, Birkhead had filed for a DNA test to determine the paternity of Smith’s baby. In December he told the Associated Press, “I am the father of Dannielynn and I think this is…a crime. I expect to be reunited with my daughter.” Birkhead says he and Smith had picked out baby names, shopped for items for the baby, and had put their thumb prints in a baby book as the child’s parents. Nevertheless, the baby has lived at the home of Smith and her attorney/boyfriend Howard K. Stern in the Bahamas since birth.
Rather than allow the DNA test, Smith and Stern apparently decided to use a common ploy in paternity cases—they stalled. If the DNA test is delayed long enough, by the time biological paternity is established the judge deciding custody will likely decide that Stern is the baby’s “psychological parent.”
Judges are understandably reluctant to remove infants from the care of the only parent or parents they’ve known, regardless of actual paternity. Stern is many things, but he isn’t stupid. He knows that in child custody cases the baby is like the football in a football game—whoever has possession is in control.
This tactic is frequently employed in adoption cases. For example, in the highly-publicized Huddleston case in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Mark Huddleston’s baby boy was adopted out when he was three days old, but Huddleston didn’t know the baby existed until two months after his birth. A New Mexico court later found that the private adoption agency hadn’t properly notified Huddleston, and had needed to get Huddleston’s permission before giving his son away.
Nonetheless, the stall tactic worked–by the time the case was finally legally adjudicated, the boy had been with his adoptive parents for over a year, and the judge ruled it was in the child’s best interests to remain with them.
Time is running out for Birkhead—Dannielynn is already over five months old, and once a baby reaches six months it is quite possible to get judges to rule in favor of the “psychological parent,” rather than the biological one. After a year it becomes practically a slam dunk. If Stern is like most litigants in this situation, he probably already has a mental health professional or two on tap to testify in court as to his bond with the baby. He probably also has extensive video tapes documenting his interactions with the girl.
The way to combat these machinations is for family courts to order mandatory DNA testing of all babies within 30 days of a putative father’s filing for paternity. When these orders are flouted, as they often are, judges must be willing to give their orders teeth by meting out punishments for contempt of court. Moreover, most fathers do not have the legal resources to fight long legal battles—courts must be proactive in resolving paternity claims quickly and correctly.
A father has the right to parent his own child. The Smith case demonstrates how easily mothers and their new partners are able to violate that right.
This column appeared in the Chicago Sun-Times.
Jeffery M. Leving is one of America’s most prominent family law attorneys. Glenn Sacks’ columns on men’s and fathers’ issues have appeared in dozens of the largest newspapers in the United States.
Stern completed and signed the birth certificate "
Are you sure?
I was under the impression that ANS did that.
Sure appears to be the case.
Sure appears to be the case.
Either way, Anna Nicole Smith appears to be the author of this sickening circus. Her poor children are her victims.
...Stern has kept Anna Nicole drugged to the gills...he drew up that will of hers, which she signed under influence.
Obviously I missed that critical news. Who proved that, and when?
Nassau is pronounced Nassau and NASA is pronounced NASA.
Most of us know there's been a double standard in place for a very long time (maybe always). While there was/is zero-tolerance for women engaging in pre-marital sex, on the other side, it's: "Oh, com'n. Guys are guys. It's expected...understood." The girls bore the disgrace of pregnancy outside of marriage.
What's become obvious is that many young men who insist upon satisfying their desires are/have/and will often pay a very heavy price for that "freedom".
I'm simply advising that parents have to educate, and warn, their daughters and their sons of the real potential of life-long consequences of their choices.
I realize I'm coming off as "preachy". Catch me on a more light-hearted subject, one we all can get a laugh!
Howard K. Stern isnothing more than a criminal, sho is using an infant to obtain a fortune. He cares very little for this child; having exposed her to drugs which in utero. This article is spot on. Larry Birkhead has claimed since last September that the child is his and he wanted to have DNA testing, but he has been thwarted at every turn.
Where are the fathers' rights groups???? This is a scandal. And, just who is looking out for the best interest of the child? She has lost a brother and her mother to drug overdoses, likely facilitated by Stern. What are the authorities thinking leaving her in the custody of such a man? If she stays with Stern, I give her chances of being alive at the age of 10 years as slim to none.
If marriage were the answer in every one of these situations, it would be an easy way to deal with it. Aside from having a child born to married parents, marriage is not always the best answer. Sadly, in many cases, I'm sure, there IS no best answer.
Oh, yes. There is one. Don't conceive a child unless you are married. Easy to say, but it happens.
"He cares very little for this child"
You said it right there. She was always a child.
The only flaw to the system is that a fat whore with money can have so many homosexuals fighting for her whore money.
Sorry it took so long to answer your reply.
From what we are now hearing, Anna and her mother had a decent relationship, until Howard came along. Remember, he has been around her for 12 years. Teenagers rebel against normal parents every day.
Of course Anna bore responsibility for her actions, but like many other regular type people, fell prey to bad influences. Her son and she are dead because of that. Dannielynn is nothing but a pawn.
As for the will, it was drawn up to Howard K. Stern's benefit. Have you seen that will? Please look up the live threads (#2 is full of info, including lists of medications that were prescribed to Anna and her aliases, and hasn't reached 25k posts yet). Then you will see just how used and abused Anna was, by her so called friends and doctors. There is a damn good chance Anna was higher than a Georgia pine when she signed that will, which of course invalidates it.
As a matter of fact, I'm going to have to search for the thread myself tommorow. Nothing going on during the weekend. Remember, the Pyjama Patrol is relentless about digging for the truth. Just ask Dan Rather hahahaha!
I believe that Stern murdered Daniel and Nicole for money and some more power. He just got too greedy, and I hope he goes to jail.
I think that Stern sucessfully manipulated the courts, and the paternity tests should have been given the first day.
That baby should not have been left in the care of Howard K Stern, for he was a “nobody”. I believe Howard K Stern is complicit in the deaths of Anna and her son. He should be tried for giving her drugs. On “Inside Edition”, she often appeared as drunk as a skunk, as one being manipulated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.