Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [tips_and_tricks] Social Security # & babies

Expand Messages
  • pireleif88@aol.com
    Delay naming of the newborn, till afterwards your arrival home from hospital. Prior to your hospital departure, advise hospital you and spouse haven t yet
    Message 1 of 54 , May 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Delay naming of the newborn, till afterwards your arrival home from hospital. Prior to your hospital departure, advise hospital you and spouse haven't yet mutually agreed upon child's name(s) first or last. The birth certificate issued by hospital should then reflect the word 'Baby' or "Baby Doe" not followed by the last name of either parents. DO not worry what hospital says, absent a first name or last name not being given to your child upon time of birth or departure
      They can not force you to name your child,
      they can not detain you,
      and should they even raise the issue of deficient name (first or last) or SS #, you tell them not to worry their silly little heads about a matter you can just as easily take care yourself once you and spouse deccide upon what to name your child, and baby naming takes place as RELIGIOUS CEREMONY At your local church or synagogue where it gets recorded in bible or annals of the house of worship.  
      Application for SS# can and should be delayed as long as possible.

      Once you decide upon naming child, you can file with county notice to amend the Birth Certificate to reflect the insertion of chills first and or last names once they are decided upon and given, since there is no law on books that I know that compels either  biologic parents to name their kid after either one of themselves with either one of their last names being applied. You can just as well  have name of John Smith, and name your kid Duncan HInes or MIckey MOuse, I know I've gone thru this personally in court of law in Georgia with ex spouse upon time of divorce and custody battles
    • Frog Farmer
      ... Why would one need a passport, as opposed to just desiring the convenience it may afford? Most countries have provisions for accepting foreigners
      Message 54 of 54 , May 27, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        On May 2, 2006, at 4:23 PM, Grant Innes wrote:

        > The problem is that a certificate may be needed by the child in the
        > future, for example, getting a passport.
        >

        Why would one "need" a passport, as opposed to just desiring the
        convenience it may afford? Most countries have provisions for
        accepting foreigners without them having a passport. A passport just
        means that the current US regime will vouch for you to a foreign
        government. People who are not foreign to that particular government
        can do the same thing. The USA may be respected somewhere still, but
        usually a country respects its own citizens more. With most countries,
        an invitation to visit from one of their nationals, plus that person's
        agreement to be responsible for you while you are there, is enough.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.