You are so right, Mary.

My fwh and OW messed up big time.

I fully believe that the OCs were meant to be a wake up for ALL the adults in this mess to cherish the GOOD and the blessings of life and not to squander and piddle away one's life.

Through all of this, even when my fwh was at his worst both those children were a light and a joy to me. They were and are proof that God can take our mistakes and make the best of them. Besides, who am I to say "no thanks, I don't want any blessings now," to God? Who am I to pick and choose which blessings I'll accept?

If I was the BH in this case I could never let my WW have direct contact with the OM if we were staying married. The logistics of parenting would be a full time job in it's self. Neutral parties would have to handle communication and OC exchanges would have to be at a neutral place. NC must be 100% with the OM and us.

Everyone talks about the rights of the BH, WW, and OM. They are valid because of just the way they feel. What they perceive as just and safe.

The most important rights to be protected are the rights of the OC.

In a case where the WW refuses to allow the OC to have contact with the DNA dad is essentially forcing the DNA D to give up his son for a 1/2 of an adoption.

When have you not heard where the child upon learning they were adopted then goes on a life long quest to find their birth parent. They feel robbed. A sadness of years that never can be relived. A loss of connection.

You can site all the laws that you want. This case should and will be overturned because these laws were based when paternity could not be proved.

Science now can. A society can not ignore the truth.

This is a very interesting debate. And a debate is all it is. Every person here has a story that leans their thinking one way or another.

All I can think of while reading this thread is that if selfish people STOP having unprotected sex (how about sex at all!) with people who are not their spouses or with people who already HAVE spouses, this would not be a problem. No debate on who has the most rights and whose well being is the most important. It just isn't an issue. Pie in the sky thinking, I know, but common sense says there is an easy answer to the problem.

But in reality, there is NO good answer in this debate for this scenario. None. Someone's rights and well-being is compromised by the choices of others and the legal outcomes. It is an ugly, demeaning and hurtful situation in the long-term for just about everyone involved...BS, OC, COM, WWS. No one comes out unscathed.

Each story is different and the well-being of the innocent parties (OC AND BS) is difficult to legislate into a single law. One size does not fit all.

Why don't people just stop doing this? I know the answer, but wouldn't it be great?

Awh yes they were. The love you feel for those babies is overwhelming Kimmy

Mary

Have you apologized to your MM's wife??

Mr. W

And the KY decision and other states that maintain the paternity presumption protect the BH (a father that IS stepping up in this situation) by allowing him/them to make this call.

Interestingly, within the OM website is a mediated settlement agreement that he turned down over a year ago. Such agreement would have acknowledged his paternity, given him bi-weekly journals of Julian's development, supervised visitation before trial and an agreement to agree on parental visitation thereafter by agreement of ALL parties with the advice of nuetral counselors. He objected to agreeing to wait for an appropriate age to tell Julian the circumstances and submitting himself to counselling. Jon and Julia WERE willing to work with him but he felt ENTITLED to more (insane stuff like insisting Julian having his last name or a hyphenated last name). He even altered his petition to requesting FULL custody himself.

Mr. Wondering

I think both of those things are perfectly sane.

You can discuss rights of the BH, WW, OM, and OC.

But you should look to possible motives. Are the adults putting the OC's interests first?

Is the WW willing to go along with BH request to deny DNA D access to his son to keep BH and her comfortable life style, and as well for the two COM?

Is the BH wanting to deny visitation to get back at the OM? Recovering with the WW to deny WW and OC to the OM?

Is the OM fighting for the right to be a father to his OC, or trying to place a road block to the WW and BH recovery. So OM can continue with the WW?

After you address these questions does everything work down to this?

Knowing that the law regarding paternity, and who does not know this for it is very common knowledge that when a WW conceives a child as a result of an affair the OC by law is considered to be a part of the marriage and the BH is the legal dad.

Knowing this the OM prior to impregnating the WW would not be the legal dad to the OC and would never have any rights to the OC, chose to ignore the law and ride the WW bare back for the gratification that not only was he getting SF from some BH's wife but that he could knock her up and their was nothing the BH could do to stop him.

OM chose immense ego gratification over the chance that he may not get to raise his own son.

Then based on that he chose to ignore the law prior to getting the WW pregnant. The OM can not claim the law is unjust. OM chose to place his sperm where the law was never going to grant him protection.

Not that it matters much, but in this case I believe I read the actual conception took place somewhere outside of KY. I think my wife said she saw Florida as the hotel room the child was conceived in.

Second, I believe prior to this case, KY had no controlling law on the subject. It was a gray area state. At least NOW OM's in KY should beware.

Finally, OM WAS offered a mediated settlement agreement that he foolishly turned down.

Mr. Wondering

p.s.- How in the world is OM's demand to have his last name on Jon and Julia's son in Julian's best interest. I guess it's not insane to request, as I can see him wishing it could happen, but a truly repentent OM that was concerned for the child and not his selfish wishes would determine that's a stupid request/demand. Entitlement is not practical. The OC shouldn't carry around a scarlet letter name with him the rest of his life. It serves NO purpose whatsoever other than to appease OM's ego.

Mr. W...it is what YOU consider selfish. Others do not see it that way. I think the position that he is selfish and entitled and not looking to just have a relationship with his son is dead wrong.


I don't see him this way at all. I think the other side of this coin is the one lacking reason and intelligence.



What scarlet letter? How does this equate to a scarlet letter?


You seem VERY emotionally invested here. Did you have to deal with anything similar??? I am not used to you throwing around such disrespectful words.

Yes twice. 1st time when she first found out and it was too early for her......then about 2 years later giving her some time to heal and again it was not taken.

Instead I was told I would never be forgiven and I should have all my children taken away from me.

I never brought my children anyway near the affair and I was not with my husband. I had kicked my husband out 6 months prior to the affair as it was my last option with him. It was over and in the middle of a divorce with him. By the time the 2nd year came around for her, I was a good 4 years out and divorced from my husband.

I think xmm told his wife that xh was still in the picture do to a few comments she made and I corrected those statements (she was emailing me pretending to be him over a child issues) and just the whole thing was bewildering to me and confussed me and so I bascially still acted like it was him and said xmm what are you talking about? xh and I were not together and getting a divorce. You knew that. He was with someone from the time he left and you knew that too.

I honestly do not believe that xmm has been completly honest with his wife about the whole ordeal. In fact he denied that oc could even be his child at all until dna results came in. He wanted Dna done before she was born and since I was so high risk (and my age ) they wanted to do an amino anyway so I agreed but he did a no show to two appointments that were made for his swabs. When he no showed for the 2nd appointment was when I hired an attorney. I had her set up the dna testing through the courts......had all the paperwork done so when oc was born it could be filed and dna established and get over it already.

But really what he did tell her or did not tell her is no concern of mine and has nothing to do with me. He waited till one month before I had oc to tell her. To many holidays and b-days etc. I basically gave him no choice but to tell her so he finally did. It was not pretty. Understandably so. He downplayed his time with me, and had her convienced oc was not his and she basically threatened me to leave him out of it. Even his attorney tried to conveince my attorney to stop the proceedings as his client swore to him the child could not be his,but in the end dna proved to be his.

but to answer your question yes I did twice.

These are all very good questons.


Most people unless put in these situations do not even know these laws exsists. Think about it.....who would think of that?

How do we NOT know that the WW was not telling him he'd have full access to oc?

Us OP's can really believe every word the WS says to us and everyone else is wrong. Until the bomb hits and reality hits and it's like.........wow he/she lied to me......imagine that

Although the law states about the legal husband I also know to many cases where paternity was established regardless.

In my state the law states that "at time of conceiption" unless otherwise proven. I did not want my stbxh responsabile for a child that was not his and had my attorney file paperwork and we went to court to tell the judge that stbxh was NOT the father of the child I was pregnant with.

No, nothing remotely similiar in my situation although, perhaps, as a BH I CAN more readily put myself in Jon the BH's position and be able to read through all the emotional propaganda OM has posted and see his still sick and twisted wayward mindset. Remember, I have seen both a wayward and a repentent wayward. I KNOW what the repentence looks like and OM's lawsuit and public "outcry" isn't it. He has NO shame...YET (he will one day, or else???)

I AM merely emotionally invested in the preservation and protection of marriage.

I am also interested to see how people here can somehow walk the line between supporting marriage, disparaging wayward mindsets but yet think this KY ruling is unjust. IMO, it's a case of "father's rights" blinding those to what is right, the obvious glaring defects in this OM's character and the BH's Father's Rights.

Did you notice that there was additional case attached to this appeal to the Supreme Court of KY wherein, I recall, the court affirmed a lower courts decision to give primary custody of a 13 year old to the non-biological father that raised her believing she was his daughter up until his now ex-wife filed for divorce and tried to deny him custody and visitation with DNA evidence that such "father" wasn't the biological father? (the child may have been a "he" and may have been 11, sorry)? What do you think on that one?

Still love ya, MDEC. I enjoy the debate. No one in KY related to this case is here and I do respect your opinions as I know you respect mine. We just disagree as to who the proper "father standing up for his rights" is in these particular difficult situations.

Mr. Wondering

Of course Dear, you really should learn his proper acronym, which is MEDC, barring that, you could just call him "Batman"!

Sorry...Thought this thread could use some comic relief!

Carry on...

Mrs. W

P.S. I agree with everything that smart Mr. W says!

Honey, you rock.

I think the mother should be in jail! I think the bio dad should be notified and the father she has known forever should always retain some custody.



I do NOT think a marriage is the most important thing. I think children, personal safety and self respect come before marriage.

As always, you and Mrs. W remain two of my favorite people.

Batman

Mr. Wondering: It is remotely simular to you as you were a BH. As well you have the strong dislike to any and all of the Om's motives. When I read letters she wrote to the OM and saw the pics of him/her and oc and indeed saw a DNA test that is where my motives for what I feel abgout this is. It's also something I've always felt before oc and before I had my twins that bio parents have a right to there kids. Unless she paid him for his sperm and or legally he gave all his rights away to his child he is the father. What is sad is the whole thing. Two men love this child and have been brought into this child's life and I don't see you have anything but pity on this WW like the OM did this to her. I guess that is what I don't understand.

I explained the double standard point twice on this thread and not once did you address it. I had valued points with that.

IMHO because you are the BH it is how you feel. Because of how you placed blame yourself perhaps? How do we NOT know that in the beginning he did not apoligize to her husband? Maybe her husband is like my xmm's wife and would not accept it. Because there was no acceptance does that mean I am not remorsful?

If xmm tried to take my child away from me and used the "married card" to his offensive I would be shouting from the roofs and taking it to every court house and newspaper I could. At that point all bets are off including how resmorsful I felt over my actions in the affair.

My children will and always have come first. Even if it means I live the rest of my adult life alone until they are grown.

Marysway

You were an OW, and your OM was married. I assumed OM did not want the OC's. That was great for you. Because in your situation there is no problem recognizing the bio parents. Thus if the OM wanted to fight for custody he could. Their case the OM has no legal standing. He knew this before he got into this.

"legally he gave all his rights away to his child he is the father"

I am not a lawyer. Do not know state to state law variations. The point is this. It is common knowledge that if a married woman has an affair. Then she gets pregnant the law assumes that the OC is presumed to be the child of the husband.

Knowing this the OM ( your champion by the way you defend him ) still went ahead and had unprotected sex. He chose to ignore that he would have no legal standing if he knocked up the WW.

Now as the spoiled OM little me first kid cries foul:

How much does he really want the OC verses the opportunity to stick it to the BH's marriage now that he can't get to stick it to the WW any more?

Another example of how the me first OM. OM chooses to ignore how he is hurting the WW, the woman who he has an undying love for. His actions show no concern over the pain he is causing her and others. Who? How about the COM. They have been damaged by his actions. What happens if these actions cause their parents marriage to break up and they now have to come from a broken home?

OM chose to ignore that when you have an affair with a married woman there is no guarantee she will leave her BH. No guarantee that WW will marry OM. No guarantee that OM will get to parent the OC.

Now the OM as any spoiled child is now having a temper tantrum. Is it not nice that it's all about him?

Road I don't see it that way and i don't see that way becasue I am the fow. I see it only because she brought him into that child's life as the father knowing he was the father knowing that she was leading two men on being the father.

I understand the keeping the marriage together and all. First of all her kids will know regardless and how the parents damage control has a lot with how this can be fixed.

There are assumptions that he is only doing this because of the BH to "get back at him". How do you know this? Because that is how most ow/om are?

I finally getting a clearer picture of this by reading most of what is being posted (the links) Mr W I'm getting to yours. I'm reading between clients and work so it is taking me awhile it's a lot......but even reading her depo she continued to deceive them both. She even sent the om a email stateing she would give him the child to raise in Fl. When asked about it in her depo her answer was in order for her NOT to get CAUGHT.

Ya know what I wish.........I wish she would have never brought the om into that childs life. If she did had no intentions of him being the "father" then she should have cut off the contact and came clean with her husband and never told the om she was pregnant than there would NOT be this battle for this little boy more than likely.

This something I would always disagree on unless I saw that he was criminal or abusive. Even with him being an OM. More and more states are recognizing that bio fathers should have there rights and that is good thing. What we as adults do we need to take the conqueses for them. People are going to get hurt with this, but also think that with the right attitude and possible counsel to guide us we can do damage control to better help he innocents in all this.

Along with haveing visation with his son comes other resposnbilties as well. He should be helping to support the boy and helping with his needs.

Again where is the blame to this WW for any of this? By what I read her whole thing was afraid of being caught, and only being caught.

Mary you claimed that the OM did not "legally he gave all his rights away to his child he is the father"

You wrote a response but did not address this point in my previous post:

"I am not a lawyer. Do not know state to state law variations. The point is this. It is common knowledge that if a married woman has an affair. Then she gets pregnant the law assumes that the OC is presumed to be the child of the husband. Knowing this the OM
( your champion by the way you defend him ) still went ahead and had unprotected sex. He chose to ignore that he would have no legal standing if he knocked up the WW."

Why do you choose to ignore OM's disregard for the law when it did not suit him and now that he wants the law to protect him now.

OM has to realize that you can not pick and choose to obey the laws that you want.

Then you change the subject about the WW not getting any blame she was wrong. But the point is this is a legal matter.

Is this because you can not rebut these points.

"I understand the keeping the marriage together and all. First of all her kids will know regardless and how the parents damage control has a lot with how this can be fixed."

How do you defend the OM's position that if his push for custody causes the WW's marriage to end up in divorce and the COM now are raised in a broken home? Shuttling between two homes. The hate that they will have for the OM. Problems and conflicts with potential step parents.

I think for you to condemn the OM you would have to condemn yourself and your choice to be selfish single parent on purpose. Unfortunately parents die young. But to deliberately deny a child the experience of growing up without both parents in the same home is extremely selfish.