Is There A Minimum Period Of Time Between Marriage And Divorce ?

[torrenova]

In terms of legitimising children born out of wedlock and not having the non Thai father register the birth and thus potentially being deprived of rights over the baby, I want to ask whether there is a minimum amount of time a couple have to be married before they can be divorced.

At the extreme level, could a couple get married and then 1 minute later get divorced ? Seemingly, the marriage would legitimise the children and as long as everything was agreed beforehand, they would divorce with shared custody.

If consummation must take place, then would divorce the next day be OK ?

Any ideas ?

[TEFLMike]

Hmmm. This begs a question. Why, get married in the first place? Surely, it is making a mockery of marriage?

Sounds as if this is a 'supersonic' speed of Marriage AND Divorce of convenience.

Edited April 27, 2009 by TEFLMike

[Marksamui]

I doubt that you can do this but I don't see the point.

You are going to have a child with a non married partner and you want the baby legally to be your's. OK so you can be on the birth cert. but as you are not married that does not make you the legal father. But there is someother form that you need to sign to confirm that you are the father, I don't know which one it is but it does exist. That gets around the Thai side.

You don't mention which country you are from but if you are UK you can pass on your UK rights to the child automatically now. Depending on which country you are from you need to check with them. It is normally easier if you are married but I would bet that if you jump through enough hoops you can pass on your rights without being married no matter which country...

[milkycheese]

I am ashamed to read this post. I really hope you are not from the U.K as what you are saying is a mockery. Why would you want to do that? You must not even love the mother of the child or you are a scam artist of some sort. It is degrading for someone to make a joke of marriage like that. I understand you want rights for the baby, but maybe you should take more time with the mother of the child and give the baby a proper start in life.

[milkycheese]

Sorry I did not understand you fully. Thats is a very gentleman thing to do. However why would you want to be the Father of someone elses child, your not an angel are you. You would be like a "Boil in the Bagdad!...

[ubonjoe]

Info on divorce marriage and legitimising the child can be found here.

LinK: http://www.dopa.go.th/English/servi/serv.htm

[t.s]

Hmmm. This begs a question. Why, get married in the first place? Surely, it is making a mockery of marriage?

Sounds as if this is a 'supersonic' speed of Marriage AND Divorce of convenience.

you aren't really that quick, are you?

The op states the purpose of the marriage is to legitimise the child.

i hope you dont teach reading comprehension.;

[TEFLMike]

I was referring to the OP's question: could a couple get married and then 1 minute later get divorced ?

Edited April 28, 2009 by TEFLMike

[Scott]

Different countries have different rules and law concerning the rights of a child born outside the country to a non-citizen parent. The procedure for securing those rights does not usually require a marriage to the mother. If you are the biological father, then once the baby is born, have your name on the birth certificate and got to embassy to register an overseas birth.

The marriage/divorce thing would not legitimize a child who is already born, and the divorce would likely nullify any birth in the future. At a minimum, an embassy official is going to look at this situation suspiciously and it could be deemed a sham marriage or a marriage for immigration purposes, in which case, you would get to jump through a lot of hoops to gain rights for the child.

[khundon]

Sorry I did not understand you fully. Thats is a very gentleman thing to do. However why would you want to be the Father of someone elses child, your not an angel are you. You would be like a "Boil in the Bagdad!...

It is a Grudge baby,

someone had it in for him.