Welcome to the
Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum

This is a community where people come in search of marriage related support, answers, or encouragement. Also, information about the Marriage Builders principles can be found in the books available for sale in the Marriage Builders® Bookstore.
If you would like to join our guidance forum, please read the Announcement Forum for instructions, rules, & guidelines.
The members of this community are peers and not professionals. Professional coaching is available by clicking on the link titled Coaching Center at the top of this page.
We trust that you will find the Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum to be a helpful resource for you. We look forward to your participation.
Once you have reviewed all the FAQ, tech support and announcement information, if you still have problems that are not addressed, please e-mail the administrators at mbrestored@gmail.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 15 1 2 3 4 14 15
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
I think Kentucky has it right. The paternity presumption is just that "a presumption". The husband and wife, in this case, has the right to deny the "father" from interferring further with their family. It doesn't force the husband to accept paternity if he doesn't want it. If the BH wants to divorce and deny paternity, he still can and HE does have the right to do DNA testing to exclude himself as the father.

OM could have worn a condom. He left his seed behind in a spoken for fertile womb. Nobody held a gun to his head and made him insert his adulterous tool there. His mistake. His gift. To bad for him. This ruling should be a warning to all OM's in KY, take her to another state if you want to father a child.

This opinion will not be reversed by the US Supreme Court. They have no jurisdiction. However, the Kentucky State Legislature or the people of Kentucky could change the law themselves at any time. As I recall, approx 13 states by law or by court opinion (actually Kentucky may NOW with this case be the 14th) follow the same or similiar paternity presumption in favor of the BH.

As far as the truth goes, that Kentucky childs PARENTS (the WW and the BH) can decide what's best for their child. Like any adoptive parents, they will likely lovingly inform such child of the truth in an age appropriate manner based upon the facts and circumstances relevant to their lives. It's parents went to the KY Supreme Court so it's not likely to remain a secret. OM can butt the heck out. He's nothing more than a FREE sperm donor trying to reneg on his gift and interject himself in a MARRIAGE.

I will concede that this presumption may not, er, is not, going to be 100% perfect. There will be situations where anyone would wish for a different outcome. However, on the whole, THIS is the proper decision and a hard and fast LAW/OPINION, to me, affords the best outcome for FAMILIES, MARRIAGE and OC's in the vast majority of situations. The fight this KY family made when I'm certain they could have settled numerous times over the YEARS this case continued is just a testament to the resolve a repentent FWW and BH will go to preserve their family and keep the serpent away.

BTW, I am, for the most part, fully supportive of father's rights. In this case...it's the injured, abused and innocent BH's father's rights that I'm most concerned with. IF he, the BH wants to father the child in his wife's womb and he doesn't deny the child within a 2 year window the state affords him too...then, by God, HE is the father whose rights I support.

Mr. Wondering


FBH(me)-51 FWW-49 (MrsWondering)
DD19 DS 22 Dday-2005-Recovered

"agree to disagree" = Used when one wants to reject the objective reality of the situation and hopefully replace it with their own.
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 104
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 104
It's a double standard. Your thinking of the bs's feelings here whem in deed the ws wondered with her fertilte womb and brouht a 3rd party who is indeed entitled to his child. Just when an ow gets pregnant and the mm can choose or no choose to be a parent.......for what is best for him at that moment.....then so can the om choose if he wants to be or does not want to be. As the law as I have understood it is, the child is presumed to be the husbands of a marriage but if paternity is asked of another man then he has that window of time to come forward.

Just as the ow has to suck it up......unless abuse of some sort is established the bio father has the right to his child.

Just as in a legal adoption, both bio parents have to sign off on that child and the courts go to great lenghths to find both parents to sign off before an adoption can done.

Yes it's sad but the ww let this other person intrude in the marriage. When a child is brought into the mix emotions are higher and deeper. Just because it's not a perfect stitch or conveient for the marraige......it is what it is.

I would dare someone to try and keep me away from any of my children. A person can make bad judgement calls, but that does not mean they are not capable of being a good parent and putting there child's needs or best interest first.

Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Thankfully the vast majority of states do not see it this way. The WW was the main cause of this mess and she gets to profit from her sin....no matter if she is a piece of [censored] or not. As in all other custody issues, the best interests of the child should be taken into account...they were not in this case.

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
Actually...it is not the vast majority of states. The number 13 (or 14) was not an indication that the other 36 or 37 have opposite laws protecting bio-OM's in this situation. Many other states have no rules at all or have a paternity presumptions which differs only slightly from the KY ruling. For example, some states give OM's 2 years to contest and others require some relationship with the OC before standing is given. It does appear that KY had previously no controlling opinion on the subject hence they ARE the 14th state to take the extreme position that the OM has no legal standing to contest paternity. (I am NOT positive of the number 14).

Here is a chart which may be useful for those that come here to determine whether their state recognizes Paternity Presumption with the relevant cases footnoted for further research.

Paternity Presumption STATE by STATE

It should also be stated that even if an OM wiggles his way into establishing paternity, such paternity, by itself, does not insure rights to custody or visitation. Merely paternity. Now he's the bio-dad. Custody is a separate determination that I guess then falls to a best interests of the child test which I hope most judges would fall heavily upon allowing the FWW and her WH to raise THEIR child with limited interference from interlopping sperm donor dad. Perhaps, in addition to child support, such Bio-dad should also be subject to the possibility of having to pay father-support DIRECTLY to the BH, say in the amount of 10% of the child support, as payment to such BH for impregnating BH's wife and presumably making him an unwilling father...but father none-the-less. Such Father support award would be made upon a facts and circumstances basis but would further deter a OM from interrering (by lawsuit and demanding custody rights) with a marriage just to keep contact with the FWW somehow. He'll really have to PAY to lay claim to his supposed biological rights as a demonstration that such claim is based upon really wanting access to the child and not just the FWW. Plus...the court would have the opportunity to financially compensate the BH for such wrong. Little consolation but a penalty nonetheless as these situations are often a battle between the bulls for the cow and the interloper would want nothing to do with PAYING the BH. If he's willing...just maybe I'll be ok with a one week visitation in the summers, strictly monitored and while maintaining NO CONTACT between the affair partners.

Again...OM had the choice not to leave his seed in the womb. Sure they both jumped into the bed together but when they left the bed she took her womb and his seed with her. He should have been more reponsible with his property. If he wanted rights to his seed, he should have gotten married or at least had unprotected sex with a single woman.

Mr. Wondering

p.s.- I also believe that many of the states that changed their laws from the common law presumption did so to give BH's the opportunity to DENY paternity. It was seen as unjust for a WW to defraud her husband and make him financially responsible for a child not biological his. I read an Oklahoma case where a BH had to pay $650 per month to his Ex-wife AND OM for 6 year old twins they had just determined weren't the former BH's. The reason most of these presumptions are being altered is to set the hard and fast rules for allowing the cuckholded BH's to get OUT of the obligation. OM's generally don't pursue such responsibility and when they do...it's overwhelmingly to interject themselves into the marriage because they "feel" jilted.


FBH(me)-51 FWW-49 (MrsWondering)
DD19 DS 22 Dday-2005-Recovered

"agree to disagree" = Used when one wants to reject the objective reality of the situation and hopefully replace it with their own.
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Quote
Again...OM had the choice not to leave his seed in the womb. Sure they both jumped into the bed together but when they left the bed she took her womb and his seed with her. He should have been more reponsible with his property. If he wanted rights to his seed, he should have gotten married or at least had unprotected sex with a single woman.

this is absurd. She spread her legs and got knocked up. What the heck difference does it make that she is the one that walked away with a child in her. A child is NOT property...is it? Frankly, this is archaic thinking. With your way of thinking...a woman could get pregnant from an affair partner that didn't even know she was married....she could be a crack addict ho that abuses her child...and you say the real dad should have no rights.

In all cases the best interest of the child should prevail and that is NOT always with the WW and her BH. The AP is no more at fault here...and even less so in my opinion..than a WW. Any WW that gets pregnant has responsibilities that far outweigh anything to do with her marriage.

You are also making an assumption about protection. Children are born every single day from "protected" sex.

Perhaps if the law was fair, women would be a little less likely to spread their legs knowing that couldn't pass of the child as their husbands...which happens A LOT!

This law is nothing more than a slap in the face of father's rights.


Last edited by mkeverydaycnt; 05/13/08 11:40 AM.
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 725
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 725
mk,

Most women don't have to pay child support because they are the custodial parent because they spend more time with the child. The few women who are ordered to pay child support are an extremely unusual (and small) group of women. Most of them were probably unfit parents or had drug or alcohol problems - IOW, not the average woman.

Your situation is extremely unusual - and not because of the courts but because most men are not interested in full custody. Most men do not fight for custody. You did, but that puts you in a VERY small minority so you can't extrapolate from that.

But if you insist on taking one case and generalizing, I do know one man who fought for and got full custody of his kids only to turn around a year later and give them back voluntarily because he couldn't hack it as a single parent.

Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Quote
But if you insist on taking one case and generalizing, I do know one man who fought for and got full custody of his kids only to turn around a year later and give them back voluntarily because he couldn't hack it as a single parent.

I think you are a liar...or there's a lot more to the story.

Quote
Most men do not fight for custody.

Where are you getting your stats from?

Quote
Most of them were probably unfit parents or had drug or alcohol problems - IOW, not the average woman.

And this little factoid comes from where?

Your standard for who should get custody sucks. What does it matter who spent more time with the child??? My dad didn't spend nearly as much time with us as my mother...WHY??? He was working to allow her to be a stay at home mom. If they got divorced..using your ridiculous logic, I should go with mom??? Dad gets penalized for doing his job...while the kids get stuck with the least fit parent. It happens every single day...

The ONLY standard that should be used is the best interest of the child with NO preference for gender.



Last edited by mkeverydaycnt; 05/13/08 05:17 PM.
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 104
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 104
Mr. Wondering: That is totally a double standard.......NOw what should the WW pay the om for taking his child away from him? What should the ww pay to the bh for bringing this child with om into this world? After all if the WW went to a fertilty clinic and took the seed home with her she would be paying THOUSANDS of dollars for that seed to inpregnanting her......I know......I've BTDT (not the seed, but the clinic, I know what it costs).

What about all the MM's out there that go for joint custody? By the standards I'm hearing in past posts that is okay.......but it's NOT okay for an OM to go after custody or joint custody of his child with ww? It's a double standard only to protect the bs......only......not the child. Sorry......IMHO your reasons come across as a person who hates someone for getting his wife pregnant (understanably) and therefore owes the bh and does not hold the ww accountable at all. When it comes to an oc you can't have your cake and eat it too. Either you accept the way it is and suck it up or do as a few others have done and don't tell and stay away and hope and pray for the best that om does not come around within that window or find out. The bs does have choices, but the oc has none?

As far as most men won't fight for custody I don't buy that either. I know tooooooo many that have it that were just and not just for there reasons to get custody. I have met so many men in the past 5 years that have full and or joint (actual 50% of the time if not more) custody with there x's. In fact more Judges are ruling in that favor on behalf of the kids. At least in my state it is that way.

Now my X, I have handed him joint custody on a silver platter and his only reason was to lower his cs and once I gave it to him, he no longer wanted them 50% of the time, only on paper to lower his cs. I'm lucky if he sees his kids 15% of the month.......Which is sad........he started something for his own selfish reasons and then turned his back as soon as he got what he wanted. He hurt my kids in doing this. Not me.......I get my kids the majority of the time which makes me happy and screw the cs.........I have my kids where they want to be at home.....but that too was his doing.

So to say most men won't fight for custody or joint custody for there kids........oh yeah there are some dead beats out there, but everyday you are seeing more and more fathers stepping up to the plate not just with paying cs, but actually parenting there children the majority of the time.

If a MM has the right to choose if he wants his blood child in his life....so should a OM. It sucks to have that intruder in your life and that reminder, but thank the ws for inviting him/her. It does take two to tangle, Unless of course she was raped then all bets are off!






Last edited by marysway; 05/13/08 07:46 PM.
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 389
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 389
Originally Posted by Aphaeresis
Your situation is extremely unusual - and not because of the courts but because most men are not interested in full custody. Most men do not fight for custody. You did, but that puts you in a VERY small minority so you can't extrapolate from that.

I am a man who has full custody of his two children and I take offense to the idea that most men do not want full custody. I think many men are realists, and understand that the courts are stacked against them and thus do not fight for full custody. But to say most do not want it is incorrect in my opinion.

I can tell you, if I fathered a child, no matter the circumstance, I would find a way to be in my childs life. This ruling is wrong. No, DNA alone does not make someone a father. But neither does marriage.

If a married couple is in the best interests of the child, why not take children away from single OW and give them to the MM and his wife?

Further, I don't think this ruling does anything to protect the sanctity of marriage. I think it tells any man in an affair with a married woman to have at it, don't worry about protection. If she get's pregnant, it's not your problem.


Last edited by MichaelinDallas; 05/13/08 07:59 PM.
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Great points MID.

I have had foster children that were taken from two parent households and put in my care(a single man with a son)....why...because not every person should be raising children.

Best interests of the children should be the ONLY standard.

Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,344
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,344
Quote
Best interests of the children should be the ONLY standard.

YES!


I never had to take the Kobayashi Maru test until now. What do you think of my solution?

O'hana means family, and family means nobody gets left behind or forgotten.

My Story

Recovered!
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 7,298
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 7,298
This post caught my eye, for several reasons. I'm a paralegal and was already aware of this case and legal issues surrounding it. I live about 40 minutes away from the couple (no, I don't know them personally, but I do know the husband/stepdad by reputation). I am also a parent.

Want some more info? Check out the active blog. It's gut-wrenching...answers questions...and sparks even more questions.

[color:#FF0000][b]BIO-DADDY'S BLOG[/b][/color]


Consider how hard it is to change yourself and you'll understand what little chance you have in trying to change others.
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
The Times article is a good piece.

Quote
But unlike the past, such allegations these days are often backed by science, introducing certainty where none before existed. As of a result, the prohibition on third-party challenges to paternity has begun to weaken. By 2000, at least 33 states had adopted rules that allowed challenges by fathers with genetic proof of their paternity, usually restricting such efforts to the first two years of a child's life. The advent of DNA testing has tread a similarly disruptive course in other areas of law, including criminal cases where exonerations once thought impossible are becoming routine. A few states have even begun allowing ex-husbands to present DNA evidence that they were duped by cheating spouses to avoid child support obligations.

For a court system that has already stripped a dad of any say in the slaughter of his children (abortion) this is just another attempt to undermine the role of fathers. Thankfully, as the article points out, 33 states are no longer living in the dark ages.

Last edited by mkeverydaycnt; 05/14/08 11:33 AM.
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
Thank you for sharing that link.

The OM is pyschotic. His total lack of sympathy and empathy for the abuse he has rendered upon the "bitter" bh is disgusting. This unrepentent boy-man shouldn't be allowed within 1 mile of that boy or his mother and father.

Here's a link to a comment debate on the issue involving the sperm donor father whinning and complaining about being put in his place by the Kentucky Supreme Court.

[trying to fix link...but I can't find it again...i'll look tomorrow at my office]


For the record, my wife did not get pregnant and we don't have any issues involving an OC. I'm just an attorney interested in the subject and legal debate. I am more pro-marriage than pro-father's rights. If men want to guarantee their reproductive rights to any and all their babies they sire THEY SHOULD GET MARRIED. I am all for the best interests test being applied gender nuetral; but, only when it pertains to actual fathers, including single fathers of UNWED mothers as well as BH's that CHOOSE to stay with their then FWW in a recovering marriage and FATHER such children.

Donating sperm ALONE does not a father make.

IMO, this ruling creates the proper SOCIAL norm and respects the relationship of the BH as the actual societal father instead of merely allowing a scientific truth to interfere. Even the states that have the UPA only allow a OM 2 years to claim fatherhood and that's just to get the right to be called the father. The liklihood of an OM getting any substantial custody is remote when you consider applying any rational persons "best interest test". This guy in KY, were he to have prevailed, obviously shouldn't get more than supervised visitation, at best. I guess, at least, such OM's in UPA states get a shot at something more than I'd be willing to give an interloping sperm donor such as this moron from KY.

Mr. Wondering

Last edited by MrWondering; 05/14/08 09:58 PM.

FBH(me)-51 FWW-49 (MrsWondering)
DD19 DS 22 Dday-2005-Recovered

"agree to disagree" = Used when one wants to reject the objective reality of the situation and hopefully replace it with their own.
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 7,298
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 7,298
Mr.W - That link doesn't work for me. Can you check it? Thanks.


Consider how hard it is to change yourself and you'll understand what little chance you have in trying to change others.
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 104
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 104
Mr. Wondering, don't you feel that your opinion is based more on feelings than law. just because you are an attorney it does not change the fact that you've been cheated on and have reconciled. I'm sure the thought with reading about this man and this stitch had to bring up what if and what you would want to do if it were you. Seriously, and I can understand that. But as you can tell there is a huge difference here where the WW has brought this OM into the picture not only to plant the seed but to be a father to her child. She allowed this man to bond with this child and it is clear by all the pictures that are posted. There is a huge differnce if she would have never broght him into that child's life at all and never did DNA.

Your wife had an affair and that does not make her a bad person. You have forgiven her and moved on to a great life with her. In fact I bet your wife is a great person. She made a horrific mistake in your marriage. What's to say this man is not a good man too? It took both the WW and om to have that affair not just the OM. I saw those letters she wrote him. He was not in this by himself.

I have not read the blog you posted will, but surely after the WW brought this man into the picture to BOND with his child and got the child ripped away from him like that I'd be whinning too. I'd be kicking and screaming.

Again this is a double standard. A MM can come into the picture of an oc and considered a hero......if he chooses to go NC he is considered a hero......and understandable. This man is steppin up to the plate and considered a wacko.

I could truely understand this rulling more if this man was never in the child's life and had no bond with his son. It's not right.

I don't know if you have kids, but consider your wife ripping your kids away from you and you did not do anything crimnal to deserve it, but she wanted to have a carefree life with her next husband.........how would that make you feel? Would you sit back and let her do it? Okay WW was married to someone else and a OM got her pregnant, but again SHE brought him into all this by allowing him to be this child's father.


Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,044
Quote
The liklihood of an OM getting any substantial custody is remote when you consider applying any rational persons "best interest test"

Well, that is a bit harsh. A rational person IMHO would see that the father deserves to be in the childs life every bit as much as the wife that invited him to rut with her.

You say the OM is psychotic...I see the WW as the nut job. She is the one that cultivated this relatiosnhip and then rips it away.

This man is no more of a sperm donor than any other father out there...you and me included. He made the same mistake as 1/2 the people on these boards...yet you suggest forgiving them. He is a MAN that is stepping up trying to see his son.


Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
Thanks Lucks...I've found a new one I hadn't found before. I'll post a link to follow but here's the CRAZIEST quote I discoverd on it:

OM Sperm donor said: "I do want to have Julian's last name changed to mine (I actually offered for it to be hyphenated Rhoades-Ricketts for as longs as Julia remains married to Jonathan)."

OMG...no... OMG

How gracious of this OM to "offer" the Fww and her BH to settle on a hyphenated last name. That's REALLY thinking about the kid isn't it???

Can you imagine?

So Julian, why is YOUR name hyphenated and your brother's aren't?

Further...look how confident his foggy butt is that their marriage is going to end. As though HE had nothing to do with it.

This idiot is NOT the father in any way shape or form. Jon IS. Jon didn't even know his wife was having an affair until the child was several months old. Jon became a father as HE held that baby in the hospital, drove Julian back to HIS marital home, fed and clothed the child, etc. The 2 or 3 hours OM had with his progeny in an adulterous hotel room does NOT compare.

and I'm sorry, but THIS guy is supposed to be the poster child for OM's everywhere that want to lay claim to their bio-children. This guy is the test case of the father's rights industry that so wants to bring all of us out of our 1000 years of tried and true, slowly changing common law and into the 21st century.

Unfortunately, I think this guy is the best OM they could ever come up with. He didn't and doesn't deserve to win and the courts don't need to torture one more recovering legitimate marriage in KY or any other state so some interloping idiot like this OR WORSE can have his day in court. It's a waste of time.

The law is NOT archiac...they just reflect a traditional family values notion not as acceptable in the post modern, "New Earth", God-less times we currently (but, I pray, not permanently) live in. As Mrs. W's mama always says, (the same mother that was instrumental in ending my FORMER wayward wife's affair)...."times change...morals never do."

Mr. Wondering

Here's a link to the quoted blog


FBH(me)-51 FWW-49 (MrsWondering)
DD19 DS 22 Dday-2005-Recovered

"agree to disagree" = Used when one wants to reject the objective reality of the situation and hopefully replace it with their own.
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 6,025
Mary,

My wife is REPENTENT.

IF sperm donor boy WERE repentent he would be apologizing to Julian's father, the BH, the man who he abused, pursued his wife, impregnated his wife, encouraged her to keep the affair a secret while Jon bonded with his son. He should be begging Jon, for his forgiveness and praying for God to have mercy upon his soul. He should be offering to step back and walk away if Jon wishes. He COULD, respectively and with contrition, request that he be given some opportunity to actually be a part of his bio childs life but only upon the terms and conditions which Jon, Julian's true FATHER, by law, dictates and WHEN he dictates it, if ever.

IF he had taken THAT route perhaps, in time, Jon would have had a Christian forgiving heart and seen to it that sperm donor did get a little time with his bio-son or not. But he could have faith that one day, when bio-son was 18, he could and would contact his ADULT bio-son and restore a relationship with him.

But no...this guy puts the whole inciduous affair on a website for the world to see. He tugs on peoples heartstrings with his notion of a romantic love affair. He makes accusations about the BH being a abusive, sick, hurtful, evil, untruthful man. He pursues his child through legal court cases exposing his bio-son and his other victim, the BH to public scrutiny and he does this all unabashedly and without apology. He berates the decent and honorable court system of KY even though they gave him more than his day in court.

What this man has done to Jon is a crime. In fact, it IS a crime in many states and he wants sympathy.

It is all just so tragic.

I do realize it's easy to read OM's story and get sucked into feeling sympathetic. But he is and was an adult and HE should have known better. FWW should have known better too...but the CHILD and the BH are the innocent VICTIMS here, NOT OM, in any way shape or form.

Mr. Wondering

p.s.- Mary...btw, bias CAN take you off course but it can also give one insight otherwise unavailable. For example, I can see that this OM is unrepentent because I know what repentence looks like. I have been reading here for years and become acutely aware of just how evil OM's are; however, my wife's OM is completely irrelevant to me so, IMO, such "awareness" can't be conveniently brushed off as "bitterness". Dr. Harely's never been cheated on but I suspect he'd agree with such strict paternity presumption laws were he here. I've read his book on adultery laws and feel this parrellel's his thinking on this issue. I have no bitterness or anything as my wife and I are happily recovered. I have read extensively on the subject, read many underlying legal cases and briefs. I've seen the statistics demonstrating the tendency of countries such as Iceland and others where men are given substantial rights to their bio-children regardless of marital status to have FAR more illigitimate children than other western cultures where marriage is encouraged by laws that support a societal norm of men obtaining such rights via mairrage. I acknowledge that my position will not ALWAYS be fair or the right call in every situation (neither will the alternative given the crap shoot judicial system); however, this KY ruling, is IMO, the way to go and achieve's a greater societal good for families, marriages AND children such as Julian everywhere, than any alternative.

BTW...What's your bias?


FBH(me)-51 FWW-49 (MrsWondering)
DD19 DS 22 Dday-2005-Recovered

"agree to disagree" = Used when one wants to reject the objective reality of the situation and hopefully replace it with their own.
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 104
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 104
Mr. Wondering: thank you for taking the time to reply.....first let me start off by saying my daughter's name is hypenated. She has my name and her father's name. what she chooses to do with that at 18 is her choice soley. But she has the option because we never know what tomorrow may bring.

My bias: I'm a FOW with an oc. Before I was an fow I was a BW twice. Well I found out last year my xh cheated on me too so 3 times. I know that pain. BTDT and could not believe I went on the other side when I did but I did. Let me tell you why I feel the way I feel and for the record which everyone who knows me knows this........I believe in alot of Dr. harely's beliefs but when it comes to a child any child I am 100% against what he is for. I even wrote him and told him so and my reasons. Otherwise I do believe Dr. Harely is pretty right on and have even referred a few friends in trouble with there marriage to this site and his books.

IMHO you are making this WW to much of victum. She is not a victum in anyway shape or form just as the om is not. I was never a victum in my case. She could have told that OM at anytime to have nc even before her husband found out. I am assuming because you have read more than me, as my time has been limited this week but by what you said she led her husband onto believe this child was his as she is sneaking around with this child to see OM? Correct? That is On the WW no OM. They are both in the wrong, but if she had every intention of staying with her husbad she should have made that right before that child was born and given her husband a chance to decide what he could do or not do. She should have told the OM that she was going to raise that child with her husband. She should have never taken that child and involved him in that affair.

Every child deserves to know there bio parent and evey bio parent because it's there dna/seed/egg deserves to be that parent. Unless there is abuse (and I mean crimnal abuse) a parent has that right.

We all make choices in our lives. Some are great ones some are awful ones that affect us the rest of our lives. Some are great ones that affect us for the rest of our lives. When I got pregnant with oc I had a choice my child or MM........I choice my child! It was a no brainer.

My child has no father and her father chose that. That is his cross to bear. In fact I can tell you that history totally repeated itself with my childs father because what he did to my daughter the same thing happened to him. The only difference was his mother made it go away and put him up for adoption. I would not do that. He has issues with it to this day over his birth mother giving him up. He knows he does as well.

So he has chosen the same path for our daughter, except I will do everything in my power to ensure she does not have those issues. But she has every right as a child to know her father.

If he chooses to bring her into his family I would allow that with open arms. And that is where the double standard comes in and I don't agree with this....

you say if the WW is pregnant the OM stays out of his child's life to preserve the BH........but if a MM chooses not to have contact he is a hero and if he does he is still a hero. So MM can come in and out of his child's life like a puppet for when it suits his family and it' the child that pays for that crap. It's the mother who has to clean it all up.

I made my bed..... I paid for what I did and then some. I accepted the fact that her bio dad is not in her life regardless if I think it's right or not. But it is accepted. I did not fight him or start a web page in fact when we went to court I made sure the case was sealed to protect my daughter. Although I guess it protected him as well and his good standing in the communty still stood.........He was willing to help financially for her until he told his wife....and then it cost me 16 grand to get cs for her and I settled. It's nothing to him what he pays, lunch money......it could have been a lot worse with everything I had as evidence, but enough was enough.....

The fact of the matter is my daughter should know her father. he's not a bad person. He would have been decent to her.

So when I see a Man steppin up to the plate I applaud him with my hand in the air. Any man regardless of title.

I have a xh who wanted to have joint custody and so I give it to him thinking he finally was stepping up to the plate with his kids only to find out after the judge signed it he sees them maybe 15% of the month........it was all about money, and I also have a xmm who wants nothing to do with his child...so I have 3 kids 2 of the marriage and one oc that barely and don't have there dad in there lives. It's just a shame. i don't care the reasons it took two!

ETA: I have a couple of ww friends w/oc an one has contact and the other does not.........the difference with the one that does not have the contact she never gave her om that chance and prayed that entire 2 years he would not come around and she fessed up to her husband and broke off all conact to rebuild her marriage. Her son only knows one man as his father...if her om came around I would have totally different feelings about that case. Our children are our future and we are given them for a reason. God does not make mistakes.......only humans do.


Last edited by marysway; 05/15/08 03:26 AM.
Page 2 of 15 1 2 3 4 14 15

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Search
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 1,352 guests, and 57 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Mike69, petercgeelan, Zorya, Reyna98, Nofoguy
71,829 Registered Users
Building Marriages That Last A Lifetime
Copyright © 1995-2019, Marriage Builders®. All Rights Reserved.
Site Navigation
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5