Last night on Dateline there was this story:
A man is informed that his girlfriend from years ago conceived a baby and says he is the father. He hasn’t seen her in years and has never previously heard of this child. Child suppot is withheld from his paycheck. He doesn’t protest too much as I gathered.
When the boy is about 5 the man is told the mother is in drug rehab and the boy will go to a foster home if the man doesn’t take him in. The man takes him in and they live together for almost 3 years. Cue the photos of little league and birthday parties at dad’s house.
Dad hears that it’s now relatively cheap to get DNA testing done, so he sends his and the boy’s off. Results come back… he’s not really the dad. Immediately he packs up the boy and sends him back to his mther (who is out of drug rehab by now).
For various legal reasons, the man still has to pay child support, even though he isn’t the biological father.
Question: Was the man an immoral scumbag for tossing the kid out when he discover they don’t share DNA? Or is he a moral paragon considering who did more than his share, considering he has no blood ties to this child at all?
Immoral scumbag: How can you toss out a kid arfter caring for him for 3 years and at least thinking of him as your son?
Moral paragon: He has paid for this boy for many years, will continue to pay support for him for many years, and even did the day-to-day care of him for years. All without having any biological responsibility for his birth.
Is it the mother who is the immoral scumbag for either not telling the truth, or not knowing who is the father?