This attitude is so incomprehensible to me. They just stop being your kids now? Question–is it the cheating that makes it so wrong, or the fact that they’re not genetically related, or what? Like if you found out you took the wrong baby home from the hospital and ten, twelve years pass, would you feel cold or disgusted towards your child?
So, this has prompted me to end my embarrassingly long lurkerhood.
Anecdote:
Five years after a very amicable divorce, my best friend discovered that neither of his putative children (9 and 11) were his biological children. He only investigated after a drunken quip from his ex-wife’s sister during Christmas 2007. :rolleyes:
When he got the DNA results his relationship with the children ended instantly and irrevocably.
Because of his situation I’ve read too much about false paternity over the last year. One thing that stood out was a comparison of the emotions of paternity fraud for some men, to those of rape for a woman. That sort of opinion may not be provable, but reflected the devastation we saw in him. It was months before we felt it was safe to leave him alone for fear he would kill himself or WORSE 
.
As for the children, his parents (now the children’s ‘ex-grandparents’) have seen them once since… but only briefly. I have no idea what their legal standing is–I presume they have no rights of visitation at all. They reported that the children’s mother was devastated and apologetic, which sounds meaningless, but she really is a great person. She’s is a loving mother and an obstetrician (you would think she would have known better). She was also a close friend of mine prior to all this, but won’t speak to me now.
If there is any good news for my mate, it is that in Australia, not only will he not have to pay additional child support, but his lawyer suggests that it is likely his ex-wife will have her wages garnished until she pays back everything he has already paid. Here is a link referring to similar Australian cases (none of them are my mate): Paternity tests prove hundreds of men duped
More anecdote:
I work in the mining industry (i.e. fly-in fly-out, lots of time away from families) so I’ve heard many second hand stories of men who upon being told that they are going to be a father, have responded with: CITE! 
…but the above case is the only time I’ve personally encountered a long term deception.
In summary:
I would never accept paternity without a test. To hell with hurt feelings.
Paternity tests, like pre-nuptial agreements, are just good sense.
Why? What would be so terrible about doing a DNA test? Fundementally, is it any different from having prenuptial agreements? Laws against domestic violence? Court-ordered child support?
The fact is that the world we live in already has plenty of practices and laws in place which assume that people are not trustworthy.
Well, it’s the “secretly” part that would actually be a dealbreaker for me. If you not only don’t trust me, but are also too much of a pussy to TELL me you don’t trust me, get gone. I’d rather do this without you, regardless of the test results.
If you marry a woman who already has children, adopt them, then divorce the mother, wouldn’t you then have to pay child support? Kind of seems analogous here.
My humble opinion is thaty it doesn’t matter whether any Doper believes the verdict was just or not. The only relevant question is whether the ruling comports with the law of the relevant jurisdiction. This jurisdiction is free to enact laws that other people find injust.
FWIW, I believe that a number of states have rules similar to this (i.e., an irrebutible presumption of paternity in certain circumstances).
I really don’t know how I would feel, but I’m guessing the fact that they’re not a part of you, that the genetic line is broken, would be a big factor.
I honestly don’t give a shit about other people’s kids, for the most part they bore me senseless and I really prefer if they keep their distance. My own, absolutely adorable and a big part of the kick I get out of being a Dad is knowing she is a part of me (sort of literally). I can imagine knowing that your family line is suddenly gone would be gut wrenching, to know it happened because you’re a sap would make it worse.
Thanks to all for the great replies. I had been reading the comments on the newspaper message board, and was overcome with the dumb. It’s always good to see intelligent comments here.
I can understand those that say that they’d stick by their kids no matter what - I would be that way myself. In this dude’s case though, he raised them from 0 - 6 years, and then had limited contact for the next 10. As a mitigating factor, as one poster pointed out, the relationship between non-custodial father and the kids is sometimes not the best, due to residual nastiness from the custodial parent. This is something we can only speculate on in this case.
DNA testing in secret? I don’t think this is a great idea.
I don’t know what happened with the wife’s request for more $ and reduced access for the father. I think this particular case was to decide if the father had to keep paying at all.
I tend to agree with those who have said the father should keep paying until the kids are 18, and then have the right to sue the ex-wife for fraud, and collect all of the back payments over a planned re-payment schedule. She really does have to bear the primary responsibility here, for the affair, the pregnancy and the subsequent lying to the father and children for 16 year.
On another note - I believe that she can continue to collect the payments even if she is living with another man. The payments are for the children, so a subsequent relationship will make no difference. Of course, it’s likely that this second partner will also help in paying for the children (house payments, car, utilities). She could likely also get money from the biological dad, could she not? (if she ever “remembers” who he is) Or does he just get off scott free?
It does suck that Fathers in general have very limited legal rights, but very clearly delineated legal responsibilities. There was a case a few years ago (no cite, sorry), wherein the mother had defied countless court orders to grant reasonable visitation rites to the father. The father went to court again and again to obtain his legal rights to visit his children. He wanted a relationship with his kids. He had never missed or been late with a support payment. His ex-wife constantly defied the court. The end result of the final court case? “For the good of the children”, the father was cut out of all visitation rights, and could never see his children again. The payments had to keep coming though.
I’m aware that the decision was legally correct. That does not make for a very interesting debate though. If I had wanted to know if the ruling comported with the law, I would have posted in GQ.
Just out of curiosity, is anyone aware of cases where step-parents end up having to pay child support after they’re divorced from a parent with kids?
Let’s say a man marries a mother of a two year-old child. If the biological father isn’t around (so, child support isn’t already being paid), and ten years later they divorce, would the step-father be required to pay child support?
I think it’s fair, or at least, as fair as the situation allows, to force the mother to eventually pay the deceived man back after the children are grown. She’s the one who messed up. But that’s only if the man no longer wants anything to do with the kids and frankly I think you’d be a pretty rotten person to just abandon a child you’ve pretended to love for years.
I can only imagine how much it must hurt to find out you’ve been cuckolded but it’s not the children’s fault. And besides, I think there are more important things you pass on to kids than DNA. Your wisdom, your values, your knowledge, this seems more important than genetic material to me.
On the other hand, the mother would likely be dead to me. That’s one hell of a cruel lie and to be quite honest, I’d go ahead and put that one in the “yes, that makes you a bad person” category. But taking it out on the kids seems awfully brutal in my opinion.
This is incorrect. I did not have to pay child support for the twins my wife gave birth to during our marriage, as they were not my own.
To me, this is the part that is absolutely essential. (Emphasis added.)
I was born with a genetically defective liver; it caused me to require a kidney transplant by age 30, and a kidney/liver transplant the following year. I know good and goddamn well that knowing your medical history is really important. It would be a terrible shame if a child were to grow up genetically predisposed to a horrible disease to parents who are less than vigilant.
I know that I will be passing along one half this genetic time bomb. I don’t know if the mother will invisibly pass along the other half. Should I have children I will be watchful for symptoms; I will get them tested. I am beyond disgusted by any faithless whore who sleeps around and then tries to palm off the resulting consequences of her decision like a streetcorner shell-game huckster and hope nobody notices. For chrissakes, if she’s going to have children by that man, she should at least do them (and her husband) the courtesy of telling the truth about their medical history in case something comes up. This isn’t a one-time lie about a night’s pleasure, this is a lie compounded every time she takes the kids to the doctor.
If we’re talking about “what’s best for the children” it should start with the mother telling the truth. I fully support mandatory DNA paternity testing. Otherwise the lesson for women is “have sex with the hottie, marry the guy with the wallet.”
Here’s another hypothetical: A couple are raising two children and the mother dies, leaving the father as sole guardian. A medical issue reveals his kids are not biologically his. He somehow figures out who the father is, and proves it. Can he sue the biological father for child support? I know from other court cases that even a contract can not sever parental responsibilities of the father in most cases, so would he have a case?
What if the bio-father sues for custody? If he won would the man who raised the kids be liable for child support?
Jonathan
I’ll go with the old lawyer standby: It depends. How’s that for an answer?
A lot of it comes down to where you live, as child support laws vary state by state. And even in the same state, there are multiple factors courts generally consider.
From my very limited research, as a general rule, no, step-parents do not (absent adopting the children) have a duty to support step-children after divorce. But they may, if they assume what is called “in loco parentis” and support the children for years and hold them out as their own.
Here’s a brief snippet from the ALR:
“More specifically, a stepparent has no legal duty to support a stepchild after the termination of the marriage.[FN3] There is no legal duty even though a stepfather earlier signed an affidavit stating he is the natural father, and did so only to facilitate family harmony through a change of the stepchild’s surname to his own and that of the mother, where the record clearly shows that the stepfather has never adopted the stepchild, that he is not the stepchild’s natural father, and that there is no father-child relationship between them.[FN4]”
BUT:
“Although a stepparent relationship alone does not create an obligation to support the children of a former spouse, a court may require a spouse to pay support for stepchildren where that spouse voluntarily accepts the stepchildren into the home and acts as their parent, and voluntarily undertakes the obligation to pay support for the stepchildren upon divorce.[FN9] When a stepparent has held a child out as his or her own, he or she may be estopped from denying paternity and therefore may be liable to support the stepchild following a divorce under the doctrine of equitable estoppel.[FN10] Liability for child support may also be imposed upon a stepparent where the stepparent voluntarily takes the stepchild into his family and assumes, in loco parentis, the obligation incident to a parental relationship.[FN11] Where a stepfather, as an incident to a new marriage, has agreed to support the children of a previous marriage or where he does so over a period of time and the mother and the children in good faith rely to their detriment on that support, the best interests of the children require the entry of a child-support decree against the stepfather.[FN12] In at least one state, the obligation to support stepchildren is required by statute as collateral to the existence of a valid marriage so that once the marriage is dissolved the obligation to pay support ceases.”
As I said, it all depends.
(1) Do you have children?
(2) Are you sure they are yours?
Only if the non-father knew the child wasn’t his biologically, and consented to act as the father anyway. If he did that, and later wanted to walk away, I’d understand if the court told him to pay up. The entire point is that the non-father was duped by the mother’s lies into thinking that the kids were his.
It seems to me that the law protects the rights of non-biological fathers in one way: Presumably they maintain visitation/custody rights even if it is revealed that they are not the biological father. This could mean a great deal to a man that doesn’t want to lose custody of the children he has raised just because it turns out they aren’t his.
Hehe. Well, you’d never know so it’s a bit like the old tree falling in the forest question.
But anyway, I brought up the idea of secret testing to counter the objection that the wife would be offended. If, as a wife and mother, you would prefer to know that a test was done, then so be it.
And what happens when your wife finds out? She sees the box in the garbage. A nosy neighbor who works at the pharmacy asks about the results? The results come back from the lab (you know these have to be mailed to a lab, right) and she opens the envelope.
My SO and I don’t have kids. If we did, and if he had asked for a test up front, I’d be miffed, but would most likely get over it. If I found out he did a test behind my back, miffed wouldn’t start to cover it.