first let me say i don't want to start a argument here i just want to post this question. why are you telling milton to divorce his wife to avoid CS and do anything possible not to establish this child is his. do you give this same advice to BW who have to watch H give CS. Also, bystander do you know if my income would be included in the 25% CS since my h and i file jointly.

Lemonpie,<P>I know this was diricted towards Bystander and K, but I am in the boat with them for milton-elvis. I believe that the main reason we feel this way, is that he doesn't have any children w/ his W, he is very certain this child is not his, and his W has already left to go home from overseas. Believe it or not, Bystander gave my H the very same advice when we first started posting on this board. Even though we do have 2 older children. His main concern is that the men on this board aren't going into this situation blind. That they know what the future may hold if the couple does divorce. It is hard to give the "right" advice to ANYONE in this situation. Whether it is telling a man to cut his losses and avoid having to pay CS for a child that is not his, telling a woman that if she loves her H she should stay by his side, telling a woman that she should cut her losses and file her own CS suit. I could go on and on with the advice that I have read here. Every person and situation is so different.<P>One thing you may want to look into if you still have some belief that this child could be your H's, is to file for legal seperation, and your own CS order for your children. That way, if it is proven that your H fathered this child, and CS is demanded, your case will have to be considered first. Other women have done similar things, it could also save you from having to pay from your paycheck to this child.<P>JMHO(just my humble opinion),<P>Tigger

<BR>lemonpie,<P>The reasons milton should take whatever steps are necessary to avoid a CS judgment are several.<P>He does not have any children with his W. The way the CS guidelines are rigged (rigged is the appropriate word here, btw), the first child takes a VERY disproportionate share of resources from the father. A typical guideline is 25% of net pay for the first child, 27% of net pay for two children, and so on. Let's not kid ourselves, this is a LOT of money for the first child, and would have a profound impact on milton's ability to provide for his own biological children should his marriage end and he remarries. Its also for this reason that men who already have children with their W's are often stuck if their W's cuckold them: Getting out would simply become prohibitively expensive. Actually, the proper analysis would take into account the age(s) of the H's children in the marriage - if they were near emancipation, I would advise denying paternity in such cases as well. It just depends on the circumstances.<P>There's another problem, IMO more relevant on a moral plane. The fact is that milton's wife violated his trust by having an affair. Milton should have sufficient time to decide whether he can really trust his wife again, and that may not happen in the two years he has to rebut the infamous presumption of paternity. Thus, to protect his downstream options, and to give himself enough time to judge his wife's trustworthiness, he should formally deny paternity.<P>Any claims that the child loses in this circumstance are utter nonsense. When milton formally denies paternity, the W retains the ability to proactively sue the biological father for "child support" until the child is emancipated. Remember, the rule is that the courts just want a chump to nail to the income shares cross. If milton makes sure that chump isn't him, the courts will oblige the biological father to cough up "child support."<P>As far as BW's, I hate to say it, but the way the law really works, the best solution is to formally separate and make sure that you have a "child support" order in place before the OW does. Some states ignore who files first and go by the ages of the children. But in any event, most women are best-suited by separating and getting a "child support" order entered against their husbands, to whom they remain married. Its devious to do this, but until the extortionary "child support" guidelines are drastically devised downward, these are the kinds of tactics that have to be deployed.<P>Finally, the W's income cannot technically be used to calculate how much "child support" a H must pay. But money is fungible, and courts have been known to say that "Your current wife can pay the mortgage, therefore you have extra disposable income that you will pay to the OW." So start filing separate income tax returns, do NOT reveal any personal information to the court, run separate bank accounts, and get your tax witholding set so that you owe money each year (i.e., don't give the CS extortionists an easy grab at your tax refund).<P>Bystander

Lemon,<BR> I have to agree with K and Bystander. In this case it's not necessarily my W who would be out to get me. Like Bystander said, I "should have sufficient time to figure out if I trust my wife again". If it comes about that my W betrays me again or we just can't get past this current A, then I would be on the hook for CS for a child that wasn't mine and the SOB, oh I mean OM, would get off scott free. And I think that would bug me more than having to pay CS for the next 18 years. In that case not only would I have to live with the fact that my W had an A, but I would be reminded of it every month my CS payment went out to her and OC. <P>I am more aware of things around me now and I realize that I have to cover myself just in case. It seems that "she wouldn't do that cause she loves me" isn't a good enough reason anymore. I used to think that about my W having an affair but that wasn't true. I am definitely in the "cover my a$$" stage right now. I'm circling my emotional and financial wagons at the moment. I am willing to work on our relationship but I won't be fooled and taken advantage of in order to fix things. <P>Tigger said that it's hard to give the "right" advice to anyone in this situation but I think that this advice is "right" for me.

Bystander, thank you sooooo much for your advice. I really appreciate you taking the time to explain the legal ramifications to me. would you please answer another question for me. do i need to get a lawyer to file for separation or CS. how does one go about this? should my dh and i have separate bank accounts now? what if i file tomorrow and she files a week later, would the judge presume fowl play on our behalf? please advice me on how to better protect me and my family. thanks

lemonpie.<P>Maybe I can help here. Yes, you do need an attorney or a paralegal (cheaper), which is what I did.<P>I filed and got a "faux" divorce through a paralegal for $500. Since my husband and I were in complete agreement and only divorcing to protect my finances, we could go about getting a cheap divorce without any contest.<P>Another on this site also has a legal separation which protects her and her children from having confiscatory income shares extracted from their overall finances. They, like us, are still together living as we always did. In fact, few people know we are legally divorced (because it is no one's business but ours) and we are forging ahead as if we are still legally married and living as we always have. The legal separation or divorce is for the courts' benefit only...to protect the Betrayed Spouse and the children of that marriage.<P>Nothing in your life has to change outwardly...you can continue to live as you always have, but you will have the appearance of being legally divorced or separated where it counts...in the court records for support determinations. You and your children will get the lion's share, which will greatly reduce the amount the XOW and OC will get, thus affording you and your husband to support your children without a great deal of financial stress because his income will go to you, which will ultimately be yours together. Just as before. Something to seriously consider.<P>Win-win.<P>Catnip =^^=<P>PS My husband initially had a great deal of trouble agreeing to the plan because he was afraid that I would get him to sign everything over to me (including the house-make SURE you get a QUIT CLAIM DEED turning any and all household assets over to you) and I would loose him like a bad habit. But after months of seeing that I wasn't going anywhere and how devoted I was to him and to our marriage and that all our years of history meant something, he decided to give to me his blind trust because he felt it was the LEAST he could do for me after all he had put me through. <P>I truly believe every Wayward Spouse OWES this acquiescence to their Betrayed Spouse to prove to them they are remorseful enough, regret the horrific damage they have caused (for their lives to be altered forever) and in gratitude that they were forgiven and weren't thrown out on their collective asses. <P>The Betrayed Spouse should not be the only one who has to suck it up and make adjustments and walk through the fire. The Wayward needs to make sacrifices for the overall good of his or her spouse and children of that marriage without whining. Just my not so humble opinion.

I agree with catnip. In my case, H and my C's were grown and on their own. My H agreed to no contact. Within one month of my "discovery", H put eveything in my name only. This included house, all stocks, savings, etc. This protects my security in case my H ever dies. OC's can not claim any of my H's estate because he owns nothing anymore.<P>This unselfish act has also made me love and trust H even more. There was no hesitation made on my H's part to put everything in my name only. I believe this also helped our marriage to start healing.<P>We all handle situations differently. Do what you have to do in order to survive, and keep your sanity. Everyone makes mistakes, but we all must protect our families and our selves. <P>ember