Community Chat

[beckyb1012]

Good ruling.

[AngusandBuddhasMom]

On 3/12/2014 terrier3 said:

On 3/12/2014 sidsmom said:

On 3/11/2014 shorelady said:

On 3/11/2014 Caravaggio said:

On 3/11/2014 JaneMarple said:

On 3/11/2014 ktlynam said:

The parents-to-be are estranged? Is he going to support this child and be in his/her life? If so, he has every right to be there at the birth of his child.

What does one have to do with the Other? If he supports the baby he can be there? and if he doesn't he shouldn't be? That makes no sense at all.

He has the obligation to support the child when it is born. He as a estranged spouse no longer has marital right to order his estranged spouse around. NJ law . I agree with the ruling.

As a resident of NJ, are you telling me that my DH of over 40 years has a right to order me around? That's what it certainly sounds like. Since when is it a marital right? You can't be serious. This couple was never married, so he is not classified as an "estranged spouse".

Some here have gone totally off the radar and insinuated he's a jerk, a drug abuser, a control freak, etc. without knowing the entire story. Just as that may be possible, so could the fact that she is just being spiteful and getting even for something. No one knows for sure. She probably will be tripping over herself to file papers for child support.

ITA. Again, we'll never know the truth & it sounds they're both idiots, but I can't help but think the "Better Bad" is the father. In this day of Deadbeat Dads, he could've ran off to the hills, never to be found again.....but he wanted to marry her. Jerks, druggies, control freaks don't want to MARRY....just that action alone says a lot to me....that HE was the one wanting to make this work...to provide a life for his girlfriend & baby. The judge did not rule who would be the better parent, but who had control of the baby until it's officially born...then the truth will come out that he's probably an ok guy? Again, we'll never know for sure. Woman as the victim? Don't be so fast to assume....history has shown women can be pretty big "B's".

The woman could be the druggie, jerk, control freak, a really bad person...but the judge I has to rule in her favor due to Roe vs Wade. From time of conception to baby's first breath, the woman has 100% control....after that! it's a different story. The ruling is not a popularity contest....so the ruling has nothing to do with the quality of humans of these parents. Only future rulings will determine that.

Just because Dad wanted to get married doesn't mean he's a Prince Charming either.

HE may be a druggie, cheat, loser, abusive, domineering creep.

They can determine custody, support and all that after the child is delivered in peace.

I agree Terrier, since my orignal response is now poofed. I like how the mother all of a sudden becomes the bad person and just out for child support. BTW, some on here need to learn how to read before they go off on their emotional rants.

By saying:

He as a estranged spouse no longer has marital right to order his estranged spouse around.

Does not imply that a husband has a right to boss his wife. I was referring to this man telling the pregnant woman he has the right to be in the delivery room. The Judge made the correct ruling.

[annie315]

Quite simply, her body, her choice.

[Mj12]

On 3/12/2014 maryebrown said:

On 3/11/2014 sidsmom said:

Steven Plotnick and Rebecca DeLuccia began a relationship in late 2012. Soon after DeLuccia learned she was pregnant in February 2013, Plotnick proposed marriage and DeLuccia accepted, but their engagement ended by September. They each retained counsel, who negotiated over Plotnick’s request to be involved in the pregnancy and in the child’s life afterward. In November, as the date of delivery neared, Plotnick filed for an order to show cause seeking the right to be notified when DeLuccia went into labor and to be present at delivery, among other relief.

Judge Mohammed, who sits in Passaic County, held a hearing Nov. 19, 2013, in which DeLuccia participated telephonically from the hospital, where she had gone into labor. He denied the relief from the bench. DeLuccia delivered the child later the same day.

Mohammed cited the doctrine of Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), that women have the right to control their bodies during pregnancy. He also cited Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992), which struck down a state law requiring married women to notify their husbands before having an abortion.

In addition, the New Jersey Supreme Court held in Kinsella v. NYT Television, 382 N.J. Super 102 (2005), that disclosure of a patient’s hospital admission to the would violate the New Jersey Hospital Patient Bill of Rights.

Brian Schwartz, chairman of the New Jersey State Bar Association’s Family Law Section, says the decision “clears up the issue for once and for all that the woman gets to make that decision” about who is present when she gives birth, and is a “good opinion for moms to know they have a safe haven in the hospital.”

Sidsmom, thanks for posting "the facts" about this...I agree with the decision. The parents were NOT married, the engagement was off 2 months before the child was born, and the mother (defendant) had every right to give birth w/o the father being present.

I wonder if the mother put the father's name on the birth certificate?

FYI:

"Plotnick also sought the right to sign the birth certificate on the day of the birth, to have the child bear his surname and to obtain an order granting him parenting time.

Mohammed held the request for parenting time was not ripe for judicial consideration, since the best interests of the child cannot be determined before birth, said. Entering a pre-birth order granting the father's application to be named on the birth certificate on the day of birth or his request for the child to have his surname, would be inappropriate because the mother did not consent to those actions, he said."

Source: NJ Law Journal

[Shorty2U]

I find it sad being there are so many dead beat dads and here is a dad that wants to be involved! I don't know the details, now if he was abusive to her then I can understand her view. So I would need more info.

By the way when I had my first child, (my son) at that time they did NOT let the father (my 1st husband) in the delivery room back then. The dads had to wait outside. Then when I had my daughter he could go in but I had emergency C Section and so he declined to go in (thinking he would pass out because they put me out cold for the C and had to cut me).

[LilacTree]

Frankly, in my day, no father ever wanted to be in the delivery room, ex or not, whatever.

In fact, no family should be in the delivery room. People faint, cry, scream, etc., and it's a distraction for the doctors, nurses, and most of all, the mother and the baby. Nowadays they even film it. I don't understand hospitals going along with this. They don't allow family in operating rooms!

It should go back to what it was before. A private moment for a baby being born.

[brii]

Why shouldn't the father be in the delivery room? I see no reason why he should be excluded - as long as the mother wants him there.

[Clover29]

On 3/12/2014 brii said:

Why shouldn't the father be in the delivery room? I see no reason why he should be excluded - as long as the mother wants him there.

But the point here is that the mother does not want him there.

[brii]

On 3/12/2014 Clover29 said:

On 3/12/2014 brii said:

Why shouldn't the father be in the delivery room? I see no reason why he should be excluded - as long as the mother wants him there.

But the point here is that the mother does not want him there.

That's why I qualified my statement - ""as long as the mother wants him there""

[chrystaltree]

I totally agree with that ruling. It's a no brainer to me. Childbirth is not a spectator sport. Other than medical personnel, the only people who should be in the labor/delivery rooms are the people mom wants there. That includes dad, even if dad and mom are very much together. I love my husband with a passion but I wanted my mom with me for the delivery, both times. I needed my mom for comfort and support. My husband wanted to be there for the "experience" but that's not what I NEEDED. He's a wonderful, loving guy and I'm sure he was disappointed but the call was mine to make.