Perhaps the one thing to keep in mind here is that if you are married and you have sex with another woman then you better be prepared to suffer the consequences. I realize every situation is different; there are gold diggers and unstable people out there. I don't understand the analogy of raping a retarded person because I don't think any of the people involved here are mentally chanllenged. At least I don't think so. I am not saying the courts have the best solution as far as child support goes. In the end no one wins. And no that is not morally sound, but neither was the situation that brought the married man into court in the first place. If you aren't willing to accept the consequences then the best thing to do is not to do it. I get so tired of people blaming everyone and everything for their actions. I don't believe a man can be raped either. The thought of it is rediculous. Any man who uses that lame excuse should pay out the nose. In any case, we all have to live with the decisions we make and take responsibility for them. If you want to dance....you gotta pay the band.<BR>

<BR>Lonelysoul,<P>I'm not arguing that a biological father shouldn't pay something. But the question is why should the OC enjoy a much better life than the marital children? Morally, there is no justification for this whatsoever. Yet, in the majority of these situations, this is precisely what is happening. Which is why the income shares system needs to be abolished.<P>As for men being raped, your out of hand dismissal of the possibility is curious. Of course such things happen. The case I'm thinking of, a man went to a party and got drunk. He went into a bedroom and passed out. His ex-girlfriend decided to, in her own words, "save herself a trip to the sperm bank" and proceeded to masturbate the man erect and mount him. She admitted in open court that the man was unconscious during all this (an a urologist in court testified that a man does not need to be conscious to reach ejaculation), which legally means she raped him. When she later sued him for child support, the court recognized the fact that he'd been raped, but said it was irrelevant as far as an assignment of paternity was concerned. He got hammered for the full income shares and is currently paying for the child. I personally find this decision sickening, but there you have it. <P>Drew

Bystander,<P>I have been reading this thread with interest. To further emphasize you point, out here where I live a teacher had sex with a, I believe it was, 13 year old boy and became pregnant by him. She was charged with statutory rape and I believe imprisoned. That part that caught everyone's attention was that the State of CA went after the boy for child support, because he was the father.<P>Does that ring your chimes or what? This is the one size fits all laws you are talking about. The reason I am hazy on the details of the case is because until the State went after the boy it was just another strange outrage, similar to the teacher in Seattle.<P>But really things do have to be changed in some manner. Thought you might like to see how enlightened CA is about these things.<P>JL

<BR>Hi JL,<P>Thanks for the note. Yeah, I'm aware of the statutory rape cases, there are actually several of them that come to mind. By definition, a charge of statutory rape implies an inability of one party to consent to sex...but even in those cases, someone could resort to a "boys will be boys and should pay the price" sort of pseudodefense. Against a 13 year old boy, it seems truly bizarre, but I've never accused the government of acting rationally all the time. <P>Which is why I cite the case where the man was unconscious. That court decision was truly wrong, and apart from the invocation of the "one size fits all" income shares system, it suggests that men have an *absolute* liability for sperm. I cannot in good conscience agree with that, given the case of the man who was raped.<P>Bystander<BR>

Okay Bystander...I will concede that in court, when the lawyers get involved and let's make a deal goes into play, a lot of unfair stuff happens. I am sorry to all the attorneys out there...please, I don't mean to offend anyone. I think we are getting away from the issue; Married men having sex with women other than their wives and getting the OW pregnant. I doubt anyone involved in a PA was raped. I think most of us are in agreement on that one. I also don't think any of the married men out there are 13. My point in all this is that the man and the woman who engaged in unlawful carnal knowledge are both equally responsible to that child they created. It is unfair to the wife and the man's children, but it is it fair for their half brother and sister to be denied? The innocent always get hurt. We don't live in a perfect world and none of us are perfect, so when you cross that line you need to face up to what you did and pay the consequences.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by trying2_4give:<BR>I CAN'T BELIEVE THE BULL I AM HEARING IN HERE! People here have the AUDICITY to blame a woman for not killing her child or giving it away so that a man doesn't have to lose the family that he deceived. <P>I have to disagree with you here. Yes, they both decided to get in bed, lie, cheat, and have unprotected sex, but every woman should take into account the conditions she is bringing her child into. Responsible people think of whether they are going to be able to provide the basic necessities like clothes and food, provide a supervised upbringing, give the child stability and two loving parents. Many people put off having children because they have not achieved that ideal yet. Novel idea? I think not.<P>A woman involved with a married man, no matter how much he tells her he loves her and is going to leave, is plain STUPID to have a child under those circumstances. It is pure selfishness. <P>Does the man deserve responsibility too? You bet, but once it is done, the woman has the final veto, so I lay the final blame at her feet.

<BR>Lonelysoul,<P>I'm sorry, but I don't think its sufficient for us to simply say that a man impregnated an OW and now his marital children should have to worry whether they will be eating next week. Our job is fix such injustices, not sit around and agree that unfair stuff happens in court. Getting back to the original topic in the thread, my main point is that we're seeing increasing numbers of pregnant OWs *precisely* because the laws are unfairly written and produce these sorts of outcomes.<P>As for anyone in a PA being raped...what about married men who are mentally ill, and don't realize the full implications of what they are doing? They do not have the ability to consent to sex - and yet we gleefully nail them to the income shares cross, at the expense of starving marital children. Is this just? I don't think it is. I don't even think its sane.<P>Bystander<BR>

Bystander, et al:<P>This kind of a topic is always a tinder box. I think some posters here think that I and/or some of us are making excuses for our spouses. That is absolutely not the case. Every day we deal with what HE did in our house on one level or another. <BR>The latest dealings have to do with waiting for the final judgment from the courts on the amount of support he will be paying. Two weeks ago it was my negative mood swing and feelings of inadequacy-something brand new to me over these past 18 months.<BR>This particular thread is aimed at the OW's out there that deliberately and intentionally and selfishly make an arbitrary decision to get themselves pregnant without considering the impact of her actions on the family of the person she is screwing. Even after she's been called, warned and begged to cease and desist. Even after she was told of the severe mental illness and alcoholism. There are women out there like that and they are only concerned with getting the man, getting money, having a child -- getting, getting, getting.<P>The innocent OC is then subjected to a life of having just one parent, having little or no contact with the bio dad, starting life with little advantage to have a balanced life and is set up to repeat history, perhaps get involved in something like this someday herself. Maybe have lower test scores, get involved with the wrong people, maybe drugs or worse. The stats are stacked against these innocent OC's and the OW's are to blame for selfishly keeping them and not giving them up for adoption so they have a real chance at life. But, then, giving them up means that they will not garner the income shares they are hoping to be awarded.<P>The way the laws are make it so easy for women to get a free ride on someone else's income. The laws, as Bystander has reiterated, incite this kind of behavior.<P>Lonelysoul: You are absolutely right in everything you say -just about- and I do agree with you, unfortunately, on many of your points. I am not disputing what you have said at all, but, to me, that really isn't the point I am trying to make. I KNOW what my spouse has done. I am PAINFULLY aware of his actions. I know what he did, I know what he said, I know what he was planning to do. That's a given. But, I am not talking about him right now. I am talking about the OW and what she coulda, shoulda done, knowing what she knew - and what she didn't - and went ahead to aggressively get herself pregnant in spite of my calls the first week of their 'fling'. <P>It was a major campaign! She brought the EPT tests to the hotel room and that speaks volumes of what her intentions were. Like I have always said, it is the woman's responsibility to take care of her own body. It's always been MY responsibility to take care of mine-why is it any different for anyone else?<P>Bystander, you can crash my thread any day <P>Love<P>catnip =^^=

Catnip...I truly am sorry for all the pain you must be going through. The threads in your post went from one extreme to the next; rape and sex with 13 year olds. I agree that women should take care of their own bodies; however, not all women think like we do. There are conivers out there, women with very low self-esteem, and with archiac ideas that if they get pregnant the man will leave his wife and marry her...I know that. I only was stating that regardless of how the conception occurred, the OC pays the price as well as the marital family. It's lousy, but it's a fact. I quess the bottom line is if we make excuses for the whys and why nots, it doesn't matter. The results are still the same and everyone gets hurt.<P>I hope your H is getting help for the alchohol problem and whatever else was wrong. I am truly sorry for your pain and your children's pain because you didn't do one single thing to deserve this. I hope you never thought otherwise. I just feel bad for that baby, for you, and for your children. The other parties involved....well, I can't feel bad for them. I wish and pray that you find the strength to get through this as unscathed as possible. When I read some of these posts, it is amazing how strong some of us have been forced to prove for our survival.<P>God bless.<P>

I say lay the blame at boths feet. I do not support killing a child just because a man happened to have sex when he shouldn't. I also think that the laws should be fair so that the OC doesn't get more money then the other children. So we all agree that should be fixed. Do you think women should be forced to give up children for adoption against their will? And I really do not think any of the MM here were raped by the OW! Yes it does happen but not very often! And what no one is dealing with is that often the MM was just as much pursuing as the OW! Of course he says now it was all her fault! She chased him! She got him when he was drunk! But now there is a child. And that child is there because both the man and the woman chose to have sex together. And both of them should be financially responsible. The OC shouldn't bet more then the marriage children. But it shouldn't get less either. Becuase that man and that woman knew you can get pregnant from having sex and they did it anyway. <P>Del

Lonely and Del: <P>To clarify, I do not condone abortion on any level and I do not think that as an option. I strongly believe in adoption, especially for the benefit of the OC and the family of the MM, so they can go on. It's hard enough to recover from and affair, but, when there is an OC involved, the impact is forever.<P>I also don't know about 13 year olds and rape, and whatever else that was mentioned. that wasn't my point of view because I don't know about it.<P>I do admit that my spouse pursued the OW as much as she pursued him. I know this is true in my case, as hard as it is for me to admit. He was blatantly destructive and selfishly went after her, rejecting me and abandoning our marriage. But, she knew immediately he was married to me. <P>I called her and told her of his illness but it didn't matter. She wanted him at any cost, and he thought he wanted her for about a month. In fact he was desperate to keep her and protect his fling with her by fielding my calls to her and run damage control.<P>I don't like admitting he was so enamoured with her that he pushed me away for a month, but, it was just a month. Why was she in such a hurry to get knocked up? Why did she feel the need to rush into it? Was it because she knew that he wouldn't want her when he sobered up? <BR>I've tried to figure this out for 18 months and I still have no real answers. All I know is that when I called her begging her to not see him that first week, she said to me so compassionately not to call her again or she would 'kick my a$$.' What a gal.<P>Catnip =^^=

Well, I think it's because they were both scrwed up. He and her both. And she's not going to believe what you called her and said anymore then you would believe her. So forget about that. Your H and this OW are two screwed up people who unfortunatly made a baby and now you have to deal with the fallout. OK. Thats the facts. Yes it was one month only. But thats long enough to make a baby. And they did. Now either you have to accept that your H is responsible for it or you have to leave. Since you love him and don't want to leave, work on accepting it is all I can say. I'm not saying it is easy. God knows I don't know what I would do in your shoes. Just face up to the real choices and make them. Be strong enough to do that. Your only other choice is to be weak and you don't seem like someone who would take that choice.<P>Del

I wrote earlier, and tried to explain how this system is wrong. there are quite a few women in this situation. The reason there are not more is pure luck, I would say most of the time there is not birth control use in affairs. But that isn't want say. In my situation, all I want is a fair deal in court. Yes, my H is responsible, yes he should to have to pay. But if the OW has her own job, and doesn't need the money, and this is extra income. Why should myself, and my child have our FOOD money taken away. The law says that child support is set up to protect the child. But the law doesn't care about protecting the children in the marriage. I have had lawyers tell me that the only way the court would not take so much money is if my child was terminally ill, so needing to eat isn't important, but dying of a diesease is justified. We are talking about $600 a month. She said, in writing that she needs no money. Yes, he should provide some help. But if after bills we have $400 left for food, how does that figure add up. Even if I work full time it still isn't enough money. Does the court care, no. That OW brought her child into a world of hell, she knew what the life ahead was, like I said before, this is the 2nd time she has done this. Myself and my child knew nothing, so we are just as innoccent as the the OC. Why is it everyone wants to back the innoccent OC, but if we try to keep our families together, than it is just a small problem for our children. While this OC is in ballet classes, my child is stuck in daycare for 11 hours, and doesn't get anything extra, because the court feels that the OC child is more important. For those of you who feel it is a equal responsiblity you are right in some areas. But I also know those of you who are so angered, are not living this nightmare. And you have stated that you would automatically walk on your spouse if this happened. I didn't ask for this life. I am not proud of my husband's actions. But don't me so quick to judge if you haven't stood in my shoes. My life is forever changed. My child's life is forever changed. This OW knew what her life was going to be, and what her child's life was going to be. I not trying to come off as angry, but it is difficult to be living this. I am losing all control over my life because of these situations. Just so you know, if I leave my husband, I won't get anything, and my daughter will be lucky to get the same as the OC. Why, because that child is four months older than my child. So in the end, whether I stay, or I leave, she wins! And her child's life doesn't even skip a beat.

Babstr,<BR><BR>Yours is precisely the sort of case that underscores the immorality of the current system. I know it doesn't seem like much, but reforming this horrible system *is* possible. And reform can be applied to current cases, so while your situation is unfair right now, things could change for the better.<BR><BR>Del, I was the one who brought up the men being raped issue. What I was really doing was backing into the notion of a man being held responsible for impregnating an OW when he is unable to consent to sex in the first place. I think everyone agrees that in the case of the man who was raped, hitting him with a child support judgment was really wrong. Now that brings up the followup question: Why is it that someone with a mental illness, who is also incapable of making a rational decision, is held to an absolute liability for his sperm? Isn't it a little strange that someone who is insane cannot be criminally charged, even for murder, and yet we'll happily slap them with an impoverishing child support judgment? It sure seems wrong to me, anyhow.<BR><BR>Bystander

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by babstr:<BR><B>Why is it everyone wants to back the innoccent OC, but if we try to keep our families together, than it is just a small problem for our children... So in the end, whether I stay, or I leave, she wins! And her child's life doesn't even skip a beat. </B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>I think the reason OC are seen as innocent, and thus deserving of everything, while the existing family is not, is because if the family stays together, it is with the knowledge that this OC exists. No, the first family did not "cause" or deserve this, but consented to accept it when they decided to work things out. Does that make your situation better or fairer? Absolutely not. <P>This is why I am struggling so much. If I stay with my husband, it will be with the knowledge that this OC will be impacting our lives together forever. Can't change it.<P>Yes, the OW knew what the child's life was going to be and chose badly! She deserves to have nothing, but you are right. I feel the same way- she wins. If I stay or if I go, she still wins because she will always have something of my husband.<P>I'm considering all the options and going through all the motions, but I think ultimately, he's going to be dealing with this one on his own.<BR>

Bystander....I am sure that in some very isolated cases the man was raped and held responsible for his sperm. Fair...no. Is it fair when a woman is raped and she has to carry the baby for nine months and then give birth. Aportion is not always an option. Even if she decides on adoption, she still has her life altered in a million ways from carrying this child. The man gave his sperm, the woman risks health problems, pressure pains, back problems, and many other changes for nearly a year of her life. Fair...no. My point...life is unfair sometimes. It seems that the big question here is money. Somehow it always is; never mind the affair going on and the baby. God forbid the OW ask for child support. Did you know that 75% of the divorced and separated fathers out there don't pay their child support. I work in the divorce biz and I see the statistics on a daily basis. I know several cases where the man quits his job, takes a job under the table, so he doesn't have to pay child support. I am not saying all men are like that, but I know of too many that are. I don't carry much sympathy for them. Again, I don't want to offend any of the supportive fathers out there. My opinion is only based on what I have seen.<P>The system is not the best, but I know in NJ, the courts will favor the chilren every time. It is not fair that the wife and marital kids suffer, but the court didn't make them suffer, the husband and his lover did. Love makes people deaf,dumb, and blind; especially in an affair when they are not living in the real world. Should we say that all people engaging in this fantasy are temporary insane? They are certainly not operating like rational adults. Should they be absolved and forgiven because of that? I say no. <P>Catnip: I cannot possibly understand why any woman would want to get pregnant out of wedlock, let alone by a married man. If your H was that odd during the time, maybe he told her he wanted a baby. Maybe he told her he would leave you and marry her. I hope he didn't, but it is a possibility. Some men will say anything if they think it's what the woman wants to hear. If he had been drinking, well, who knows what was discussed; or not discussed. At this point the whys and why nots aren't that important. The end result is a baby. You have to look into yourself and decide what is best for you and your children. You didn't create this problem. It was hurled into your lap and there is no shame in being angry and resentful. Life can be challenging enough; especially when you did nothing to bring this about. I truly hope you find your way through this.

Lonelysoul,<BR><BR>So you agree that the raped man has been treated unfairly: The correction for this is to relieve him of any child support obligations, of course. By extension, a man who is clinically insane cannot consent to sex, and he should be relieved from child support obligation as well. You can see where I'm going with this, then: Why not a system of degrees of culpability? We have exactly this system in the criminal courts, for example.<BR><BR>However, your position that the OC wins at the expense of the marital children is morally indefensible. Saying "life isn't fair" cannot justify the outcome that babstr and others face. The child support system needs a drastic overhaul. Btw, I take issue with your statistic that 75% of men don't pay. Can you provide reference to that? See Sanford Braver's _Divorced Dads: Shattering the Myths_ for a more realistic assesment of the situation.<BR><BR>Bystander

Bystander....we can debate until the cows come home. I never said that the OC should win or does win. I said no one wins, but maybe the lawyers. I cannot answer for all states, but I get the figures from the state of NJ and deal with family law circumstances on a daily business. Most of the time, it isn't pretty. I don't need to read a book...I see about 200 clients a year going through divorce and separation

Lonely,<P>All I can say is what I said before. You are not living this. It is obvious no matter what someone says you feel that the MAN is mostly responsible. You sound like the OW is a saint because she had a child. Why is it so hard to support ALL of the children? I can't believe how much you will go on and on about how bad the men are, even if they are drunk, or even if they are mentally unstable. I would like to know what you feel is the perfect solution. Am I supposed to invite this viper of a OW into my home, just because she had a child from a one night stand? Doesn't that bring shame to all of the children, when they forced together? Or is my child supposed to lose her father, because of this situation. <P>She is the one who just wants the money. I just want both children to have the same lifestyle, but according to you, my child shouldn't get even that. I guess what you really mean is my child's life isn't as important as the OC. I guess if I had been some local girl, and went around and got pregnant by multiple men, then you would be in my corner. But because I was deceived, and my child was born into marriage, we are just up the creek. If I left my husband, it looks like I would have to support my child, NOT count on his support.

LS,<BR><BR>You're right, we can debate this until the cows come home. I'm going to make several assertions here, some of which you'll agree with, and perhaps some of which you won't. First, morally speaking, there should never by winners or losers. But our courts don't work that way, and its wrong. Usually, the first one to get an income shares award "wins." To the extent that the OW can sue for an income shares first, our society is currently incenting women to become pregnant by a MM. IMO, we can change the system to remove such incentives; its a matter of political will. I doubt you argue with this view - you only need to babstr's situation to know that something is very wrong with the system right now.<BR><BR>Second, I believe that an absolute liability for sperm is ridiculous. I've cited the case of the raped man, and you countered with the case of the raped woman. But you didn't logically fill out the example. To make the analogy correct, a male rapist would have to select a woman and decide he wants her child. He would then impregnate her, *force her* to carry the child to term, *forcibly remove the child from her* (with no chance for custody, even *if* she wanted it), and then, in a sickening twist, *force* her to pay 25% of her net income for the next 20 years, even if that meant her own marital children went hungry. Morally, you can't defend that position, whether the rape victim is male or female, IMO. And if we're willing to acknowledge that at least some of the time there should not be a liability for sperm, it does beg the question of where do we draw the line? I personally have a problem entering a child support judgment against the mentally insane.<BR><BR>Finally, I respect your field of work, but surely you realize the grave dangers in making public policy on your subjective impression of what's going on, and not a systematic study of the situation. I've said my piece, and I think I'll go back to lurking now.<BR><BR>Bystander