OH LC! You just made me cry.

Thank you.

- Kimmy

Most of the time, where a thread wanders does not bother me at all. But sometimes the opening post of a thread has a very important tidbit of infomation in it that needs to be kept in the foreground.

What does Mr McB, the BH, know about this continued contact?

And what does he want?

In light of Mrs. McB's continued contact, and basic stance regarding her adultery in general, what is best for Mr McB?

That is the real question in this thread.

IMO

I so agree, Appy. I also want to know with all these cries for the "rights" of bio-dad, where are Mr.McB's rights? He by all rights should have the say so in this if Mrs.McB wants to stay married to him.

OUCH!!

With all of this debate, I wonder if we lost our original poster?

He does not have the right to decide whether or not the OM sees the child. That is up to the OM and a judge. He does, however, have the right to decide whether or not to stay in the marriage if the OM ends up seeing the child. If his boundary is that he will not stay in the marriage if OM is hanging around, then great. Mrs. McB can respect that boundary by giving the child to OM or up for adoption, if she wishes.

[quote}
He does not have the right to decide whether or not the OM sees the child. That is up to the OM and a judge. [/quote]

You state that like you have a clue, hoopsie. The fact of the matter is that in many states, the OM has no rights whatsoever. So the husband is one of the decisionmakers in this process.

If you don't like that, and it's true for your state, then contact your legislature.

McBecca---if you're still around, you will need to contact a lawyer (if you haven't already) and listen to their advice. But in general---for your side of the matter the lawyer will tell you to do nothing. The burden is on the OM to challenge this in court (if he can). You should be as busy as possible proactively working on marriage counseling. If you have to fight this, you need to do so together (and it provides the opportunity to build love for each other through the process).

The other issue is that the quicker you can recover your marriage---the faster you (and H) would be able to entertain allowing the OM access to the child, if that was something you truly wanted to consider. But to successfully do this your marriage MUST be on solid ground, and you still have to put many checks and balances in place.

To allow this immediately in your current marital state will be a recipe for disaster.

Here's the deal, Becca:

"I am in tears.... it took me all day to decide to read it, I finally opened the email..."

Everything in your post after this opening sentence is the reverberating noise of adultery.

If you were a FWW you would have taken all of 30 seconds to pass this email unopened to your husband.

I agree with K. It is your marriage and the happiness of your existing family that hang in the balance. Not OM or any of his rights, whatever they may be.

It is time you choose.

With prayers,

For what it's worth I thought I put this internet search result here. Paternity rioghts all come down the state in which the child resides. In Michigan, (my state) OM would not have standing to sue to establish paternity or demand genetic testing even if MsBecca admitted his likely paternity OM would be out of luck and fully dependent on the good will of Mr. and Mrs. McBecca if they wanted to allow him any visitation.

My advice is McBecca and her husband should consult with an attorney in their state ASAP to determine their rights and NOT respond to OM until they do so. Prior statements of paternity test results and the like MAY be used against them in any petition. They should shut up and consider the situation fully for a short period and IMO Mr. McBecca should be taking and have the drivers seat in any and all negotiations. He's likely the only or most sane person involved right now.

Anyway, here is some reading material on the subject:

4.2.1. Biological Father's Interest - Presumption of Paternity
For centuries there has been a legal presumption that a child born to a married woman is her husband's child.[11] The presumption was indisputable, if husband and wife were cohabiting at the time of conception, absent proof of the husband's impotence.[12] The biological father was consistently denied any opportunity to establish paternal rights over the child, although certain members of the marital family and their descendents could challenge the presumption if the parents were not cohabiting at the time of conception. The presumption of paternity, which originated in the common law, has been codified in California and elsewhere. (See, e.g. Cal. Fam Code § 7540). Although genetic test results now make it possible to disprove a husband's paternity, most courts will not award substantive parental rights to the natural father of a child conceived within and born into an existing marriage, that wishes to embrace the child. (See e.g., Michael H. v. Gerald D. 491 U.S. 110, 127 (1989)).[13]

Under California law, a child born to a woman who is cohabiting with her husband is conclusively presumed to be a child of the marriage, unless the husband is impotent or sterile. In Michel H. v. Gerald D., supra, the United States Supreme Court considered whether the presumption infringes unconstitutionally upon the biological father's due process rights, and concluded that it does not. The Court found that the biological father had no protected "liberty" interest in the parental relationship and the State's interest in preserving the marital union was sufficient to support termination of his relationship with the child.[14]

The Supreme Court of Iowa came to the opposite conclusion in Callender v. Skiles, 591 N.W.2d 182 (Iowa, 1999). In that case, the mother was separated from her husband at the time of conception, although husband and wife reconciled and were once again cohabiting when the child was born. The husband assumed responsibility for the child, and began to raise her as his own. Six months later, the child's natural father filed an application to establish paternity, visitation, custody and child support. Although DNA testing showed that the husband was not the child's biological father, the trial court granted the husband's motion to dismiss the application, on the ground that the biological father lacked standing to challenge the husband's paternity, under Iowa's paternity statute. The Supreme Court of Iowa reversed, finding that the statutory provision violated the biological father's constitutional due process right, because the father had a protected "liberty" interest in establishing a parental relationship with his child. Similarly, a Minnesota court found that a man had standing to seek to establish his paternity through genetic testing, based on a showing that he had access to the mother at the probable time of conception, Witso v. Overby, 609 N.W.2d 618 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000).

In a unique decision, The Supreme Court of Louisiana found that neither laches nor the presumption of paternity prevents a biological father from avowing paternity six years after the child's birth, T.D. v. M.M.M., 730 So.2d 873 (La. 1999). The court reasoned that several policy factors, including the advantages of the child's receiving support, inheritance rights and nurture from both fathers, favored allowing a biological father to avow his paternity, where the action will result in dual paternity.

The Supreme Court of Montana permitted the biological father of two children, born to another man's wife, to establish paternity and obtain custody of the children, after the deaths of the mother and her husband, the presumed father, Girard v. Williams, 1998 Mt. 231, 966 P.2d 1155 (1998). Under Montana law, the presumed father's relatives, who had physical custody of the boys, lacked standing to challenge the biological father's petition.[15]



I'll add to that these laws are evolving more in favor of men. Case Law, even in California, have been more lenient in giving or allowing establishment of paternity by bio-fathers such as OM herein. Google "paternity presumption" for a more detailed listing of websites addressing this issue.

Mr. Wondering

I still want to know what happened to our original poster? Did all the heated debate scare them off? Troll? Or what?

Becca...what's YOUR take on all these responses?

No, she is not a troll Owl. She is a very mixed up WW.

First of all I want to thank ALL of you for your posts, opinions and arguments. I do need to see this from every perspective.

Let me explain further.... this was a 2 yr long A which started while I was M as an EA and developed into a PA once H and I were separated (but living in the same house and still married).

However, when BH and I decided to finally get a D, we also agreed to do counseling to help things go smoothly for the sake of our 2 DD at the time (12 and 3). It is during this time of reconciliation that I became pregnant. XOM and I had ended our relationship because I felt strongly that I wanted to at least give my marriage a try because BH was attending counseling and we were both willing to try once again.

Once pregnant I told XOM about the baby and he immediately thought the baby was his. We went back and forth on this issue for months, BH did not know the strong possibility, he wanted me to wait until the baby was born before jumping to conclusions.

In the meantime we also moved to another state (3 weeks before baby was born!) the baby came 3 weeks early and the minute she was born, I knew she was XOM's child. We did a DNA test and she is his.

We met with a lawyer (BH and I) and we were told pretty much what has been stated here, OM has no rights because child was born during the marriage. The burden is on him if he wants to challenge it. Either way, most likely he will not get much custody or visition, BUT for certain will be required to pay child support. COnsidering we are in another state, it will be a long time before he ever had much visitations period.

This devasted OM (he met with his lawyers - he visited 5 and all but 1 refused his case!) because from the start he has always expressed he wants to be in her life.

Another assumption on my part was that BH would immediately want a D but to my surprise and shock, he did not. He said he would raise her as our DD provided OM NEVER has access of any kind to her. He asked me to agree with him on this so we can move forward and work on our marriage.

OM is a single person, but does not live the kind of live described here, no drugs, no alchohol, no hobbies other than music. He is ready to raise her and has asked me several times if I would be interested in giving him full custody of her. He has an extended family willing to support him and help him raise her as well. "Ideally" he wants me to come back to the state he is in so WE can raise her together. No he does not just want to get in my pants.... he assumed if the baby was his, I would move back so we can begin a life together as a family because he also assumed BH would not want to have anything to do with me or baby.

Of course, I still have very strong feelings for OM and the decision to keep him completely out of her life is not something I am prepared to do. BH knows this. As of just this past weekend, I had become more at peace accepting that perhaps staying married to BH and working on my marriage is what is best for everyone. Unfortunately, it does not take away my guilt over the pain I've caused BH and now OM as well. But I realize this is something that will never go away and the result of my actions.

Because we live in another state OM's involvement would be very minimal, and we both agree not what is best for baby. She should not have to be told she has "two daddies" it would be cruel to grow that way. The only way this could work is if I were to move back so she can begin a relationship with OM and BH will have to reliquish his rights.

BH and I have been talking about this and we have both agreed that if worse comes to worse we would need a D. He agrees that NC is the onyl way for this to work, but he also understands my feelings in the matter.

From everything I've read, there is no "right" answer. BH would agree for me to move back to the state where OM lives so he can have a relationship with his DD, but that means BH will only get to see his two DD's summer and every other holiday. Neither of us like that idea very much but he has said this would be the only way for both fathers to have right to their children.

So that's more on my story. It is truly a moral dilema and yes, some of you will say I have no morals at this point, but whether you like to believe it or not, I do. OTherwise I wouldn't be asking for advice, prayers and guidance.

Torn apart, McBecca <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

With a history of days between postings...

Mrs. W

McBecca, I would like you to read a thread by a FWW with an OC. She felt much like you and regrets it. not sure where I belong

Your 2 DD"s with MrMcBecca should not have to suffer not seeing their dad becasue of your selfish choices.

Why can you not see that your BH is doing a completely selfless thing?

I truly think that you still want to be with OM at the expense of your "original" family, for lack of a better way to explain it.

I wish my BH were as selfless as yours! I do not have an OC issue, but I would give anything for my BH to have this kind of love for me.

I really feel for you, I know how fogged out it gets with OM and especially the fantasy life that surrounds it, I lived it myself......

Why would it be better for OC to be with "bio dad" rather than MrMcBecca? Not that "bio dad" does not have his good points (other than sleeping with other men's wives), but is MrMcBecca such an awful dad that OC would be irreparably harmed? Or is it that YOU want OM and are willing to break up your family?

I do not envy your position and I really think you are still in a fog, from one WW to another (well, I consider myself a FWW).

Well, here's the deal. You agreed with your H/BH that you would go to NC with OM...period?

NC means NC...while I understand the debate back and forth here, there is a WORLD of difference between a 'father', and a "daddy".

OM may have physically "fathered" the child, he's not the "daddy". It sounds like that's the role your BH is willing to accept...assuming that he's not forced to sit here and compete with the OM for you and your daughter. Just because he had sex with you does not give him furher rights...to anything. Legally, or IMHO at least...morally. All he did was have sex...that doesn't make him the daddy, and he doesn't have the option of that role since YOU WERE ALREADY MARRIED TO BEGIN WITH!

Was a paternity test ever done? Not that it really matters, but the reality is (from what you've described at least) that EITHER man could have fathered her.

So while you're still sitting here confused over what you're feeling for whom, you need to come to some conclusions on this stuff.

OM does NOT have any 'rights' to your daughter in any fashion.

YOU need to make a choice, AND STICK TO IT. Neither choice is easy...BUT...no choice is the most painful to all of you. And changing your mind during this counts as no choice.

If you need to work out what you feel here...go to NC with OM...COMPLETELY. Take it from all of those who have been through here, once you get through the end of that 'addiction' to OM, you WILL be able to work things out clearly. I've seen it personally.

My suggestion is to tell OM that you've chosen your marriage. He has no legal right to your daughter...and to never contact you again. Have this come from you AND your H.

Then change your email, phone, etc...so that he CAN'T contact you that way.

And then come back and assess where you stand on things in 45 days. It takes 30 days to make a habit, and 30 days to break one.

What will you lose by doing this? Nothing, except the one man who's making your life a real he!! at this point. What do you gain? Your marriage, your daugther(s), your sanity, control over your OWN life.

Talk with your H about this...see what he says.

Wow, Owl that was a very good post.

There is no great solution to a situation like this. Everyone is hurt. I agree with Aphelion and Faithful Follower.........what about Mr. McBecca and oh,...how about the COM? What is best for them? Don't they deserve consideration in the decisions being made?

The rights of OM and what best for the OC are nearly always the focus of posters advice in these situations, but rarely are the betrayed spouse and the COM considered and what is best for them. They didn't ask for this to be pushed on them any more than the OC did. But usually the focus is on OC and what is best for the one child........often to the exlusion of the EXISTING legitimate children of the marriage! They often must yield to the benefit of the OC.

For that matter, if it were the other way around and the OW was single and pregnant with a child from MM, the talk is usually focused on what a deadbeat the MM is if he does not want to be part of the child's life and wants to repair and protect his current family. Still COM and BW hurt (and the financial suffering CS brings) are not much considered. Just OC and poor OW. It is a double standard.

There are NO solutions that protect everyone from the disaster created by infidelity when a child is produced. Everyone is hurt, including OC, because of the decisions of two people who didn't care about who they hurt at the time.

I vote for NC any way you can get it. Very few marriages can tolerate an extra "parent" in the mix. It just brings more pain and confusion for the children.....all of them.

But if OM can prove it is his child (if his state allows) and he forces the issue legally, he will be able to get visitation, pay CS and be in this family's life for the next 18 years. This is the consequence and the BH and COM will have to deal with it.......as usual.

*McBecca, I know what horrible decisions you have to make! I feel the anxiety for you......you seem like a good person. Talk honestly with your husband and pray for guidance. Mere mortals cannot know the right answer and what is best for all involved.

Four words.

SPEAK TO MY LAWYER.

Acquiring visitation rights is going to be one big legal hassle for OM and probably involve child support payments.

However, if he goes through the trouble to pursue it, then you will be confident that he is genuine in his desire for a relationship with the child.

Owl,

do you believe that fathers are intechangeable? Do you believe that someone that is acting as "daddy" is just as good as the "father" acting as "daddy"?

I am genetically linked to my children. It affects the way I behave around them, the feelings I have for them, the sacrifices that I will make for them. There is no other man on earth that has the ability to love my kids the way I do, no other man on this earth has such a vested interest to see my kids matriculate to adulthood as kind and decent human beings.

I do not think that farthers are interchangable.

McBecca...why do you presume to take custody of other two DD's if you choose to move back to the other state? Wouldn't the best interests of the prior children to remain with their faithful father, to not be exposed to OM? Why can't you accept the consequences, without debate or legal intervention, of your poor choices. After all, you can get a job and pay child support to Mr. McBecca so he can properly raise your older daughters. You can and perhaps rightly should be relegated to having visitation in the "summer and every other holiday".

Your husband may have considered you taking the kids but when it gets down to it you'll need his consent to move more than 100 miles away with his two legitimate daughters. He likely won't consent to you going when push comes to shove. He's discussing it rationally NOW but likely merely trying to talk you into staying with him. If and when you choose that path away from him, he'll likely resist, legally. You should foresee this and acquiesce to relinquishing primary custody of such daughters to him if you do choose to move to be with OM. I suggest you think hard about not victimizing your husband further.

That would be the right thing to do. Afterall, your overriding interest herein seems to be the "paternal" rights and feelings of the OM father. What about Mr. McBecca's rights to HIS daughters? If he wants full primary custody ... shouldn't you give it to him?

Mr. Wondering