Should man, who was duped into thinking he was dad have to pay child support?

[evenflow1969]

So a couple gets married A few years later they have a child. A short period after they have another child. Fast forward and the kids are 17 and 15. The man learns neither child is actually his. They divorce and she gets spousal support and child support even though the kids are not his. This poor shlep is now 55 years old, to old in his mind to have kids as at this point if he got some one pregnant today he would be 75 when they(the kid) turned twenty. He is not only robbed of all the years he could have had an actual family of his own, but is left with the realization that he will leave no blood heirs. Is this right ?

 

[Disir]

A few years later they have a child. A short period after they have another child. Fast forward and the kids are 17 and 15. The man learns neither child is actually his. They divorce and she gets spousal support and child support even though the kids are not his.

Spousal support is limited usually to a time frame. How did he learn that neither child is his? Is his name still on their birth certificates?

 

[evenflow1969]

A few years later they have a child. A short period after they have another child. Fast forward and the kids are 17 and 15. The man learns neither child is actually his. They divorce and she gets spousal support and child support even though the kids are not his.

Spousal support is limited usually to a time frame. How did he learn that neither child is his? Is his name still on their birth certificates?

Do not know how he found out. His name is on birth certificate. A DNA test was taken, what caused suspision I do not know! Does it realy matter? This is not an isolated incedence happens all over the US and Canada with varying details.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The court will probably recognize him as the 'father' for legal records.

If he has worked to have a good relationship with 'his' children, matters should work out.

The fairness of the issue is something else, of course.

We had a similar matter happen at Crown Colony, and the wives there made sure that the woman had no social life whatsoever in a community where she had once been a valued member. She and her new husband sold out and moved within a year.

 

[evenflow1969]

The court will probably recognize him as the 'father' for legal records.

If he has worked to have a good relationship with 'his' children, matters should work out.

The fairness of the issue is something else, of course.

We had a similar matter happen at Crown Colony, and the wives there made sure that the woman had no social life whatsoever in a community where she had once been a valued member. She and her new husband sold out and moved within a year.

Should laws not be fair and just? Shouldn't the wife be forced to devulge real fathers name? Should real father not be liable for all the years with no support. With a good percentager of that support going to the guy that actually paid. Wife having to move in my mind is not enough of a penalty. She moves and problem solved. The poor 55 year old guy also is not living in his former home of oer twenty years.

 

[DGS49]

When I was in law school (before the advent of quick and reliable DNA testing), if a married woman had a child, that child was IRREBUTTABLY presumed to be the child of the husband. That is to say, even if the husband could prove that he was sterile or impotent, the presumption prevailed. The court would not listen to those arguments.

Unfortunately I don't know if the law has followed technology. But it wouldn't surprise me if the presumption was still in effect in most jurisdictions.

And anyway, if the husband was getting his regular provision of nookie, he shouldn't complain. They could have been his, but for the lottery of fertilization.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I understand what you saying.

If it is equity you want, then the laws need to be changed.

 

[Disir]

A few years later they have a child. A short period after they have another child. Fast forward and the kids are 17 and 15. The man learns neither child is actually his. They divorce and she gets spousal support and child support even though the kids are not his.

Spousal support is limited usually to a time frame. How did he learn that neither child is his? Is his name still on their birth certificates?

Do not know how he found out. His name is on birth certificate. A DNA test was taken, what caused suspision I do not know! Does it realy matter? This is not an isolated incedence happens all over the US and Canada with varying details.

It does matter because mother of the children saying something is different from a DNA test proving it. It's a better opportunity for a remedy.

 

[Jarlaxle]

When I was in law school (before the advent of quick and reliable DNA testing), if a married woman had a child, that child was IRREBUTTABLY presumed to be the child of the husband. That is to say, even if the husband could prove that he was sterile or impotent, the presumption prevailed. The court would not listen to those arguments.

Unfortunately I don't know if the law has followed technology. But it wouldn't surprise me if the presumption was still in effect in most jurisdictions.

And anyway, if the husband was getting his regular provision of nookie, he shouldn't complain. They could have been his, but for the lottery of fertilization.

Nope, nothing has changed. I know a dude who owes close to $200,000 (probably more by now) in child support for a kid that isn't his. (And he hasn't seen in 15+ years.)

 

[pismoe]

I think that it is WRONG but i have heard that the presumed Father is liable to support simply because the kids NEED support .

 

[evenflow1969]

When I was in law school (before the advent of quick and reliable DNA testing), if a married woman had a child, that child was IRREBUTTABLY presumed to be the child of the husband. That is to say, even if the husband could prove that he was sterile or impotent, the presumption prevailed. The court would not listen to those arguments.

Unfortunately I don't know if the law has followed technology. But it wouldn't surprise me if the presumption was still in effect in most jurisdictions.

And anyway, if the husband was getting his regular provision of nookie, he shouldn't complain. They could have been his, but for the lottery of fertilization.

So if the guy got laid all is better huh ! I She spread her legs for the guy and that entitles her to lie cheat and steal? You seem to value a quick lay more than truth and fairness!!!WTF I did not realize raffling off a pussy was legal! Nor did I realize it should be!!! You make a strong argument for "All the lawyers laying on the bottom of the sea bein a good start!

 

[Disir]

It should be mandatory for every birth where there is a father present that a paternity test is given. It would save a whole lot of crap later on.

 

[evenflow1969]

It should be mandatory for every birth where there is a father present that a paternity test is given. It would save a whole lot of crap later on.

Wow, a reasonable answer to a real problem!! We need more of that all over the planet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure! Now how do we fix the situation for the ones who have already been bit by it?

 

[evenflow1969]

It should be mandatory for every birth where there is a father present that a paternity test is given. It would save a whole lot of crap later on.

Wow, a reasonable answer to a real problem!! We need more of that all over the planet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thank you An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure! Now how do we fix the situation for the ones who have already been bit by it?

P.S. I bet this would cut down on cheating and STD's. Less likely to cheat under those circumstances and if you were still going to, you would be more likely to use protection, if ya knew you would be caught immediately at birth! How do we get this started?

 

[rightwinger]

So a couple gets married A few years later they have a child. A short period after they have another child. Fast forward and the kids are 17 and 15. The man learns neither child is actually his. They divorce and she gets spousal support and child support even though the kids are not his. This poor shlep is now 55 years old, to old in his mind to have kids as at this point if he got some one pregnant today he would be 75 when they(the kid) turned twenty. He is not only robbed of all the years he could have had an actual family of his own, but is left with the realization that he will leave no blood heirs. Is this right ?

Actually, if he was a real parent who loved his kids

It should not matter. If he loves them, he should want what is best for them

The wife is the one who was unfaithful, not the kids

 

[evenflow1969]

So a couple gets married A few years later they have a child. A short period after they have another child. Fast forward and the kids are 17 and 15. The man learns neither child is actually his. They divorce and she gets spousal support and child support even though the kids are not his. This poor shlep is now 55 years old, to old in his mind to have kids as at this point if he got some one pregnant today he would be 75 when they(the kid) turned twenty. He is not only robbed of all the years he could have had an actual family of his own, but is left with the realization that he will leave no blood heirs. Is this right ?

Actually, if he was a real parent who loved his kids

It should not matter. If he loves them, he should want what is best for them

The wife is the one who was unfaithful, not the kids

Ya, the check goes to the wife not the kids. Why should she not be forced to devulge real fathers name and have him pay for the support or better yet the kids go to the duped one and she pays support!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why not both?

 

[Jarlaxle]

All she has to do is claim she doesn't know.

 

[Care4all]

As long as he was married to his wife, and living in the same home....her kids were his kids and he was responsible for the household....the kids know no other father than the man who acted and lived the part as their father....

Does this man now hate his kids that he reared so much that child support for them for a couple of years till they hit 18 is something outrageous...? now that he knows that they are not biologically his? Really?

The whole situation does suck wind, but the two boys did nothing wrong....

 

[rightwinger]

As long as he was married to his wife, and living in the same home....her kids were his kids and he was responsible for the household....the kids know no other father than the man who acted and lived the part as their father....

Does this man now hate his kids that he reared so much that child support for them for a couple of years till they hit 18 is something outrageous... now that he knows that they are not biologically his? Really?

The whole situation does suck wind, but the two boys did nothing wrong....

Why is the guy being such a prick?
How could you not love kids you raised for 18 years?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

While I agree that family law is biased against husband and fathers, I would think in this particular scenario if you had raised two kids from birth to the ages of 15 and 17 for all intents and purposes, morally and ethically, you are their father. I'm sure the kids would be just as emotionally scarred to find out their mother lied about it all of those years too.

In any case, situations like this are incredibly rare.