KKK Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 The mother is known, that is why a child always has a legal mother. Not in all cases..so ALWAYS is wrong....I've been told by nurses at Red Cross hospital that many new borns (I'm assuming they were home births) are dropped off ....they have NO known mother or father... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captspectre Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Sounds odd. Does that imply one is not legally the mother if they are not married to the father? No, that's where the term"bastard" comes from! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beano2274 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 The mother is known, that is why a child always has a legal mother. Not in all cases..so ALWAYS is wrong....I've been told by nurses at Red Cross hospital that many new borns (I'm assuming they were home births) are dropped off ....they have NO known mother or father... Very true, but they are unwanted pregnancies. I have always liked the idea of these so called baby drop off places, as at least it gives the child the chance to live, you hear many stories of babies being found in bins or rivers these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ludditeman Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 The mother is known, that is why a child always has a legal mother. Not in all cases..so ALWAYS is wrong....I've been told by nurses at Red Cross hospital that many new borns (I'm assuming they were home births) are dropped off ....they have NO known mother or father... I think the point here is that The mother can be seen to be having a baby, the person who impregnated her is often up for debate. In the western world the man accused of 'impregnating' is assumed guilty until he can prove otherwise. In Thailand the man accused of 'impregnating' is assumed innocent, unless a contract to produce a child (aka marriage certificate) is produced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rotary Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Gosh just get a Visa of some type, there are several ways depending on age and other details but it might be easier than getting a Visa based on being a father. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALFREDO Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 You are completely right. See here. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/467527-thaivisa-in-singapore/page__p__4419945#entry4419945 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
julemanden Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 Sounds odd. Does that imply one is not legally the mother if they are not married to the father? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atoosa07 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 If you are married to the mother of the child and you are on the birth certificate and also you have registered yourself as married with your embassy and your child has your countries nationality then you are the legal father of the the child. On the matter of visa you have no right to residency however you are entitled to Non-O visa, also if you are over 50 yrs old then your circumstance of the Non-O visa changes, which I have been told by immigration officer you don't need to show 400000THB (because by rights and Thai law your child is looking after you----don't ask how that works but that is Thai law in your favor, and it does not matter how old is your child) in your account and that makes it easier to get visa on annual bases. But I would suggest you seek more legal advise from your local immigration office.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mario2008 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 If you are married to the mother of the child and you are on the birth certificate and also you have registered yourself as married with your embassy and your child has your countries nationality then you are the legal father of the the child. On the matter of visa you have no right to residency however you are entitled to Non-O visa, also if you are over 50 yrs old then your circumstance of the Non-O visa changes, which I have been told by immigration officer you don't need to show 400000THB (because by rights and Thai law your child is looking after you----don't ask how that works but that is Thai law in your favor, and it does not matter how old is your child) in your account and that makes it easier to get visa on annual bases. But I would suggest you seek more legal advise from your local immigration office.... You would still require to show 400,000 in the bank or an income of 40,000 a month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lite Beer Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 On the matter of visa you have no right to residency however you are entitled to Non-O visa, also if you are over 50 yrs old then your circumstance of the Non-O visa changes, which I have been told by immigration officer you don't need to show 400000THB (because by rights and Thai law your child is looking after you----don't ask how that works but that is Thai law in your favor, and it does not matter how old is your child) in your account and that makes it easier to get visa on annual bases. You need 400,000 baht in the bank OR 40,000 monthly income whatever age you are. 2.18 In the case of a family member of a Thai(applicable only to parents, spouse, child, adopted child or child of his/her spouse): Permission will be granted for a period of not more than 1 year at a time. (5) In the case of a parent, one of parents must have an average annual income of not less than 40,000 baht per month or a money deposit of not less than 400,000 baht for expenses within a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lopburi3 Posted November 21, 2011 Share Posted November 21, 2011 I have been told by immigration officer you don't need to show 400000THB (because by rights and Thai law your child is looking after you---- You must have been told that prior to police order 777/2551 as that is no longer true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now