yes. Okay... K... autumn day...enough of your quiz questions.

Jeeze, so sorry medc. Not trying to be a pain. I'm truly interested in how you view things regarding these types of situations. Trying to get a handle on whether you think there is ever a point in time a non-bio father would ever become the true father in your eyes, and would deserve the same rights you believe should be granted to the bio.

But I'll leave it alone.

ps. you're not very nice.

p.s. I've just had it with discussing this stuff which I made very clear on the other thread. You all are making it sound like I think the BH has no value. Never said it... never implied it. Just want to see the bio dad taken care of too.

and when you make two comments like this don't blame me for getting a bit defensive with you.

Oh ok.

I'd really like to blame *someone* for you getting defenseive with me though.

Let's see.. who can take it?

Pepperband?

Yeah.... Pep, I'm blaming Pep.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I agree it's all Pep's fault! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Here's a question . . . if BS decides in a year that he just can't do this . . . raise this child as his own and divorces the WS . . . should he be forced by the courts to pay child support for the next 17 years on a child that isn't biologically his. . . and possible college after that?

More and more men in this situation are using paternity test to disestablish paternity during divorce. Is this fair? If the BS bonds with the child and acts as the father should he be released from responsibility if the marriage fails. The courts have ruled on both sides of this issue so I'm just wondering what you all think.
If he doesn't pay then who does? Which "dad" will be forced to pay for this child? Both? Neither?

I think that if the BS was duped into thinking that the child was biologically his and he finds out that he was cuckolded then he may have a right to seek redress and not be financially bound to that child. If he willing took the responsibility to raise the child that he knew wasn't his, and the marriage fails, then he should probably be on the hook to support it.

I also think that there should be some time limits also. If you act as the father for 10 years, divorce and expect to just walk away without supporting the child because you find out the child isn't yours; I have issues with that. If the marriage fails the first year or two after the birth of the OC . . . if I were the BS . . . I would not want to be stuck with the financial burden of raising another man's child. Let the courts track the OM down and stick him with the bill.

But what if I really loved the child and my WS decides to keep the child from me becaue it isn't biologically mine?

Question, questions, question.

OK

it IS all my fault

does that mean I get to decide the solution ??? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

oh gosh CN

those are some thorny hypotheticals <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

Pep

Yes they are . . . that is why I'm asking others what they think. I want to know how my thoughts compare to others.

I know for me . . . If I were the cuckolded BS . . . I would still support my child after a divorce, because that is the way I would see it . . . my child. I would pay . . . but I would be furious at my wife for letting me live a lie for so long. I hope I wouldn't let it affect my feelings for the child . . . I hope I'm a better man than that . . . but am I really? I just don't know.

CN ,this matter has been addressed by the courts. There are time limits that a H or any man can address paternity... after that, they are out of luck. There are many, many men out there paying CS for children the courts know are not theirs. It is because paternity was not established within a time frame... usually 4 years.
The WW can in fact three years from now, divorce and seek CS from the OM. Either way the one of the men gets the shaft! Happens all the time!

The courts are finally starting to punish the woman that lied about paternity and make her make restitution with interest to the duped party. It's about time!

this is multi-layered

emotional responses are not always parallel with legal/moral options

Pep

MEDC,

I don't see it as getting the shaft if I am asked to support my child . . . it is an obligation that I would happily fulfill . . . I think . . . unless I was paying for another man's child . . . then . . . geez . . . I quit.

No I agree about paying for your own child... it's the other scenario that really stinks.... and happens all the time!

Yes . . . but if I loved the child . . . then I would willing support it right? Or would the anger and resentment at being forced to pay for another man's love-child just kill my feeling?

The men/and women too, that can get through these things . . . I salute you. I think I would just want to run away and hide.

I think you would pay to support the child if the mom really needed the money and you knew it went for the child's welfare.
Of course if the other man could be forced to pay, all the better so long as the mom didn't have him sign away his rights in the past.

In my case, my supposition was that if I was going into this situation with foreknowledge of the child's origins, I was on the hook. I think that's a good assumption for a BH to make---look at this from the worse side and ask "can I deal with it". It also gives you motivation to not have the "worse" happen.


One could argue about this, especially with regard to the time lapsed. If the wife went running off to the OM---I'd put him (OM) on the hook, especially if it was within a two year timeframe. But if it happens later down the line, or if the demise of the marriage has nothing to do with the OM---the husband should be on the hook.


Agreed.


I would suggest that this isn't legal (although I have heard of cases that this has happened). This is an area where I would actively advocate "fathers rights".

The men/and women can get through these things but what about the children? Speaking from personal experience to have my world kicked out from under me and find out that the man who raised me wasn't my bio-father sent me into years of therapy! I was an adult when I got the news - imagine what would have happened if I had been a child!

Frankly, there are huge red flags going off at MEDCs strident and persistent pronouncement of his position here and that's not going to change come h*ll or high water, no matter how the real life situation unfolds with real life consequences that are pretty damning for that position... So I'm not writing to change his mind - I'm not going to bother. The children can go to h*ll as you can see by his well thought out position here. Just so long as bio-dad gets his legal rights to be in that child's life. Whatever the consequences.

CN I would challenge you to consider that true parents - not exclusive to biological - consider the needs of children under their care to be their highest priority - above their own pain, loss, pride, etc. That's what would really be in your heart if this ever happened to you. The children who you had raised, loved, cuddled, taught, disciplined... they still have your heart, no matter how detestible the other parent involved has behaved toward you. Every father - like K - who has stepped up to care for a child has that "true parent" quality in their character. The rest shouldn't have signed up to be parents in the first place. Bio or otherwise. For the sake of the children.

edit to add - and mothers like Dealan-de - who also step up and care for children who may not be biologically theirs, but love those children as their own, for the best interests of the children, regardless of the hurt of infidelity... for the sake of the children. True parents, indeed.

Well, there you go running off at the mouth with very little information again. As I said yesterday and have repeated today, if the OM signs over his rights, I support their decision 100%. I have advocated her sending a NC letter after the OM's decision to not see the child if she works on her M...I have told her that I think she would be wrong to take her kids from their father...
So, unless you want to read the threads and stop putting words in my mouth.. there is someone that can go there and its not the kids.


My last post on McB's thread tonight.



I have no problem as I clearly stated yesterday with a parent deciding for themself to make that call... I just don't like it forced on the parent.

I will suggest that you read AmIok's thread to see the advice afforded her in dealing with her WH's children that she has been raising. IS it really the "kids be damned" or do I just see things differently than you?

I'm reading - all of it. the cold hard ugly truth that unless the OM behaves like a real father would - at the peril of his own broken heart and ego, and let this family remain intact without his interference, you would rip this family apart in an instant to protect his rights.

My last response to you is I am reading. We definitely disagree. And will likely ALWAYS disagree when it comes to protecting the family vs. the rights of an intruder. And my opinion is thoroughly and well thought out and will not change because there are consequences no matter how you slice it. You just minimize the consequences of your POV. Period.

As do you. Period. Exclamation mark!