Has anybody heard of the case in Pennsylvania of a man who found out that his son was not biologically his, so he stopped paying child support to his ex-wife? Both the Pennsylvania Suppreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld rulings that stated evidence of paternity was not to be allowed into the child support hearings.
Apparently this is not a unique case because under common law it is presumed that when a married couple has a child, the man is indeed the father of the child.
In the case I mentioned, the man cut off all ties with the child in question because he feared that if he appeared attached to the child the courts would consider him the legal father (which it turned out they did anyways). This is the part that I am confused about. As a mother, I could never see, even if I found out that somehow my son was not biologicaly my own, ever cutting off contact with him. In this case the child was four years old when his father discovered that he was not his own and up until then he had been having regular visitations. Of course, I do not know how it would feel to experience such an enormous betrayal, but still…can you imagine how that little boy must be suffering?
So, is this law (that the man married to a women is the father of children born during the marriage) fair? Or is it further punishing men who’ve been betrayed by a cheating wife? It seems like a lose/lose situation no matter how you look at it.
BTW, there is an article about this on page 50 of the November Playboy in case any of you bought it for the, ahem, Jesse Ventura interview.