Well, it wouldn’t, but I do not think the bond works the same way in reverse as it were. I feel differently towards my child than I do towards my father, particularly as a grown man. The feelings of a father towards his child tend to be a lot more unconditional. Or at least they are in my experience, and anecdotally in discussion with other dads.
That being said, if I found out my dad was not biologically my father I would not feel differently towards him - he still raised me.
EXACTLY! Every time I interacted with the child, I would only hear the constant droning sound of the lies my wife told me. It would overwhelm any sense of obligation toward the child.
Beyond that, I don’t understand why this sort of reaction is surprising to many of the posters here. Or why they think that only non-parents could think that way. Think about it. Every day, fathers abandon wives and children. Women abandon their kids. Deadbeat dads are so common that legislation is created to enforce responsibility on those people.
Is it really that different from saying “I can’t be a parent to this child so I’m giving it up for adoption”? Except, I’m saying that I am NOT a parent to this child. I have legal obligations to provide money, but beyond that, it’s NOT my child.
It’s not that big of a reach. Some people could get past it and raise the child. Some people couldn’t. At least I know myself well enough to say what side I’d come down on.
Why do some of the opinions expressed in this thread surprise you so much? I can understand not liking them but they should hardly be news to anyone.
Have you never witnessed a family where one parent or the other clearly cared little for the kids? I have seen it. Not even all that uncommon in my experience (not common either but definitely there). I think parents are one of the leading causes of death of children in the US.
There seems to be some romantic notion that once you have/start raising a child some love thing descends upon those people and nothing else could matter more. That may happen to some people but clearly not all or perhaps even most. Sad but seems the way of things.
Why don’t I do it? Because I love my children; I’m legally and morally responsible for them; and I enjoy spending time with them.
I’m not sure what your point is though.
At first, she said it was a combination of her husband (a minister/priest of some kind) not wanting to embarrass their doctor and post-delivery hemorrhaging that put her life in danger. The story is really fascinating and complex, from the members of the community who gossiped that the girls had been switched because the resemblances were so strong and contrary, to surprisingly strained relations between the siblings that were raised together and the siblings that were not raised together.
Yeah…I cannot imagine how devastating it must be for a child to have this happen. I just figured part of being a parent is getting beyond your own feelings to be there for your kid. I’ve often heard parents say they wish they could experience a painful thing to spare their child.
Plus couldn’t you just as easily argue that evolution has equipped men to raise any kids that his “mate” gives birth to since we’ve only recently had paternity testing? People argue that women are generally more likely to want fewer partners and men more due to evolution–doesn’t this make a man more likely to just assume and bond to any child his mate/wife has?
I’m not surprised that people would abandoned their kids, but I am surprised that people could love their kids one day, then just turn it off like a switch the next. I think that would only be possible if the love was never really there in the first place. Could it really be possible to be a kid’s daddy from the day he’s born, to change his diapers, feed him, help him take his first steps, tuck him in at night, care for him when he’s sick, teach him how to throw a football, have him look up to you and trust you and worship you, then have the inhumanity to be able to turn on a dime and tell him you don’t love him anymore, see you later?
I concur with the suspicion that those who say they could do that have not had the experience of raising a child. Either that or that are just stone sociopaths.
In most of the cases I’ve read about children (or embryos) being switched (pre-) birth, both sets of parents seem to want contact with both children, regarding both of them as “theirs.”
The whole thing is a mess that ought not to happen.
One heartbreaking case I read about recently had two girls switched at birth. One set of parents found out, but never said anything until the girl they were raising died. Then they sued for custody of the other girl. The custodial parent won custody, but the girl latter ran away to the birth parents.
Jonathan
I disagree with your black and white approach here, and agree with those who think that the issue is more complex along a variety of continuums (continua? continumes?)
Hypothetical examples:
biological child mine, mother moves across the country, I pay child support for years, but see the child once/year… I would only feel a bit like a father.
Biological child mine, raised him to 6, divorce, lives with mother, lots of access… I would feel very much his father.
or:
Not my biological child, I live with mother, raised him from age 3, now age 15… I am very much like a father.
Not my biological child, lived with mother for 5 years, divorced mother, still see child regularly, send child support payments… I feel very much like a father
Adopt child - feel very much like a father
But:
Raise child to age 6, divorce, 10 years of sending support with only limited and decreasing access, and then find out that I was never the biological father in the first place… I would feel very conflicted.
This situation in particular is not black and white.
And would that change if you found out they weren’t “yours”?
My point is that once you have taken responsibility for that child, that child is your responsibility.
The man in question raised those children for ten years. You don’t stop being someone’s father after ten years. Not if you’re any kind of worthwhile human being.
Actually 6 years, but I imagine your point still stands.
I still don’t think that you can call the man in the OP “not a worthwhile human being” though. It may be more complex emotionally for him to have gone through this than you know.
It seems probabe that he had limited access to them for the past 10 years (from ages 6 - 16). Also I don’t see anywhere in the original news article where he has “stopped being their father”. He sought a legal opinon on whether or not he needed to continue to pay support for children that were not biologically his, but had been purported under false pretenses to be biologically his. Perhaps his intention here was to make sure he DID NOT have his access limited, because he loves the children.
Also remember that the whole court case began when the MOTHER went to court to get more support and LESS access for her ex-husband.
But he only did all of that because of the fraud perpetrated on him by his wife. Why shouldn’t this be treated like any other fraud? (I mean legally, not morally)
I know that this is settled law, but it is terribly unfair.
I’d argue that this is different because it’s not really a sudden revelation. When you get pregnant due to rape, you know that this child is a child of rape. Thus, you have the option to put it up for adoption and thus never face it at all, or to even abort it. You don’t one day realize your eight year old son is the product of rape and then reject him.
Sure, there really are. But there are ways of passing those on to other people, why is it special to hand it on to your own child?
Besides, some of us do feel very lucky to have the chance to continue our family line. Before I became a father, I really did feel a lot of shame, believing that I would never pass on my Father’s family name to continue the family line. It makes me so happy to see my parents’ delight when my daughter comes to visit, one thing I’ve been able to do right in a longish line of fuck ups.
Out of interest, what act of emotional fraud has been committed on you of such a scale (that you’ve recovered so easily from), that you can dismiss other people’s opinions on this so quickly?
Theoretically no, but in a practical sense the relationship would change because I would probably end up getting divorced and having children with another woman.
That’s true according to the law in many jurisdictions, but not in all. The real question here is whether a “duped dad” should continue to bear legal responsibility for his non-biological children. Simply asserting that he should is not very persuasive to me.
Nor is it very persuasive to assert that paying child support is not “punishment.” Strictly speaking, that’s correct, but the reality is that being ordered to pay money by the government is a negative thing as has been recognized as such for a long time.
Normally under the law, people are ordered to pay money if they have done some wrong, such as breaking the law; breaching a contract; or committing a tort. In other circumstances, such as with taxes, people are assessed based on some standard which is applied to everyone.
It’s unusual that a person who is a victim of a fraud would be ordered to pay money to the perpetrator of that fraud, and it runs counter to most peoples’ sense of justice.
I’m not sure that a person’s “worthiness as a human being” should be the deciding factor for whether or not they are ordered to pay money.
Situations arise all the time where a person could go through some inconvenience and be a big help to another person. For example, donating tissue to save the life of a family member. If somebody refuses to do so for trivial reasons, then perhaps they are unworthy as a human being, but most would agree that the state should not get involved in forcing those individual people to do something.
Out of curiosity, what exactly constitues emotional fraud sufficient to excuse people for behaving so badly toward children that they claimed to love the day before they found out?
Damn straight I dismiss those opinions. Those opinons suck.
How do you know the kids is a product of rape if you had sex with your husband three times that week?
Past tense. They probably don’t even remember those years; he’s just a guy who shows up occasionally. Ten years of limited access, especially at that age is easily enough to erode away both sides of a parent-child bond.
He’s not a “father”. He’s a wallet.
Your husband always wears condoms, had a vasectomy, or is otherwise infertile.
Fetal DNA analysis
etc