Yes yes, all very lawyerly. Ordinary people don't couch their words in legal jargon, they want straight answers. A straight answer is that an Amended birth certificate contains FALSE information.
The Father listed on my official BIRTH certificate, is not my BIRTH father. You can say "assignment of parental responsibility", but most people assume it to mean "BIRTH" father. The term "Birth" on the Certificate implies an Adjective Modifier of every term contained therein.
The usual and ordinary Rules of English compel everyone to associate every term on that Legal document with the incident of "Birth", not some legal hearing which may or may not have occurred at some later date, and which the State (the originators of the document) won't even confirm or deny.
And that is the INTENDED purpose of these legal machinations. To conceal the truth.
The Father listed on my official BIRTH certificate, is not my BIRTH father. You can say "assignment of parental responsibility", but most people assume it to mean "BIRTH" father. The term "Birth" on the Certificate implies an Adjective Modifier of every term contained therein.
The usual and ordinary Rules of English compel everyone to associate every term on that Legal document with the incident of "Birth", not some legal hearing which may or may not have occurred at some later date, and which the State (the originators of the document) won't even confirm or deny.
And that is the INTENDED purpose of these legal machinations. To conceal the truth.
Everything you just complained about is wrong, because it rests upon the erroneous assumption that the word, "Father", is exclusively defined and used in common language to mean only the biological or genetic father who sired or beget the child. Nothing could be further from the truth, which can be confirmed by looking at the dictionaries, historical publications, and centuries of vital records. The broader definition in common language usage has always included "a person who brings up and cares for another" (Merriam-Webster) and "one related to another in a way suggesting that of father to child" (Merriam-Webster).
You cannot dismiss this as "lawyerly talk" or other dismissive terms, because this comes directly from the dictionaries and customs in common usage, and not from Black's Law Dictionary. It also reflects obvious reality. If anything, your attempts to narrowly define the definition of a father to only a person who is the biological or genetic father or sire of the child is itself being "lawyerly." There simply was no DNA testing for genetic paternity in 1961. Just as the custom had been for centuries, the father was the person responsible for parenting the child or otherwise identified by the mother or other authorities as the person responsible for the child. If it so happened the person identified as the father did not actually sire the child, there was no DNA testing available to conclusively prove otherwise. Consequently, governments, families, and social institutions have always employed the commonsense definition and usage of the word to denote the person responsible for acting as the male parent of the child, without regard for the unknowable genetic relationship.
Since the documents used the common meaning of "Father", which connotates the person responsible for male parenting of a child, they certainly did not lie by not disclosing the person who sired the child. To argue otherwise is to make the ludicrous false claim they were responsible and capable of determining the biological or genetic father.