Forced to pay child support for children that are not biologically yours?
 

I was wathcing a rerun of Dateline NBC last night. There was an interesting story about a man who after divorcing his wife found out that he was not the biological father of three of their four children. He and his wife had already been divorced for quite some time when he discovered this and throughout that time, he had been paying child support. Well, this guy went to court trying to get out of paying child support; he felt that the biological father of the three children should be paying child support for them. He still wanted to be the "father figure;" he just didn't want to pay the monthly child support. Well, the judge decided that since he "played the father figure" to these children while him and his wife were married, and even during the time of divorce when he fought for custody of the children, he is still responsible for paying child support.


What do you all think about the situation? Yes, I do understand that he played the father role; however, his ex-wife never told him that these children were not his, so how was he to know? Out of trust for his wife, he was made to believe that these children were biologically his. He did not "father" these children, was made to believe that they were his, so I do not think that they are *his* responsibility. I do believe that in a way the man is being selfish in not wanting to pay the child support even though in his eyes and in the children's eyes, he is their father.

My vote: He shouldn't have to pay child support.

I agree with you.

I wonder what kind of message this judge is trying to send...maybe men will be more cautious to take on a "fatherly" role in the lives of children if they are afraid that the result will be them having to pay child support for kids who aren't theirs. That doesn't benefit anybody.

And shame on the mother for being deceitful and downright nasty -- first of all not telling him that the kids might not be his, and then taking his money now even after the truth is out -- that's terrible! I wonder where biological "dad" is now...

He shouldn't have to pay child support. He took care of the child because he told or though it was his. If the woman cheated and got pregnant the man that the child doesn't belong to shouldn't be punished.

I saw that Dateline when it was on about a month ago, and I agree that he should not be paying child support for the three children that are not his. The guy did turn out to be somewhat shady, however, because he has been fighting this in court and he hasn't seen any of the kids--his biological daughter or the 3 boys that aren't his--in 2 years, yet he claims that he wants to be there for them and be their dad. Also, the mother made me incredibly angry, because she kept crying about "how could he do this to them?", when it was really her fault for sleeping around and lying to him to begin with. She claims that she never thought that the boys weren't his and that's why she never mentioned it. She also never mentioned the boys' biological father (and the kids didn't mention wanting to meet him or anything), although she probably knows who he is. I think that they should track him down and make him pay, since he's gone for I think 13 years without having to face the consequences of his actions. In the end, I feel really bad for the kids because they're going to be messed up either way.

The judge told the man not to tell the children that he was not their biological father. One day the school counselor called the man and told him the children knew and wanted to talk to him. Soo, the father went ahead and told him that he is not their father. By doing this, he violated his court order and his visitation rights were suspended.

About the biological father, the mother said that he doesn't need to jump into the picture in the middle of everything. She doesn't want him involved. If she didn't want him involved why did she screw him for so many years and allow him to father three of her four children while she was married to another man?? :rolleyes:

Forgot to add:
There was an update on the show and the ex-husband and the four children are now re-establishing a relationship.

Fatherhood is not about making a baby... It's about taking responsability for it. I think the biological father and the 'father figure' in this case should both pay a share of the child support.

Child support is not punishment for having kids and 'losing' a custody case.. It's to provide for the welfare and well being of people that you are responsible for.

If he has no visitation rights, etc... then no.. he shouldn't have to pay anything. If he is still the acting father figure then yes.. he should.

biological connections don't really mean anything.

Tough situation.
Bottom line: the state will not willingly "bastardize" a child, because who will end up footing the bill for their support in the end? The state--and we already have too many people on the state's support rolls.

In the state of Texas, paternity is presumed in a marital relationship. If a woman is married to a man, and conceives a child with another, she cannot even place the true father's name on the birth certificate. Mixed up, I know.

I am still trying to figure my thoughts on this one out...I can see both sides, and in the end, someone loses out big, in many cases through no fault of their own (not saying dad should have said anything to the kids, BTW). Too bad so-called adults don't always act like adults, eh? Because mom couldn't stay faithful, and Dad couldn't keep his mouth shut, there are 3 kids out there who will be forever burdened with the knowledge that they are-at least to an extent-unwanted by someone.

Amen.

Oh yes, another BTW.....

The father won custody of the children, but as a train engineer, he was away from home a few days a week. After two months with the children, he ended up giving full custody to the ex-wife. After giving her custody is when he found out.

Very true...I had limited contact with my biological father (didn't meet him until I was 12 and haven't seen him in years) but he still had to pay child support for me. Just because he chose not to be in my life doesn't mean that he is not responsible for me being here.

Sounds like my mom's BF's situation.

He and his wife divorced 10 years ago. He had this nagging feeling that the two youngest children were not his...and after some coaxing from my mother, he went to get paternity tests done. It was too obvious--the kids were pale skinned compared to their older siblings. [their mom and my mom's BF were dark skinned]

The paternity tests proved that he was not the father of the two children. He's being given back the 10 years of child support he had to pay.

Here's a link to the NY Times article that was done on the case, if anyone is interested (I couldn't find anything from Dateline):

http://www.dadsusa.com/nyt31101.htm

I disagree. If you have a part in making the kid you'd better damned well better help to absorb the cost.

I think that's terribly wrong for him to have to pay child support. And furthermore, how did the wife get away with having children that weren't his! I wonder if the same man fathered the children or if she was sleeping with mulitple men. SO SAD. To think that man thought those were HIS children for so many years. He's already dealing with enough emotional array and on top of that he has to pay for what isn't his?

Yes, he was their father for years and yes he wants to continue to be in their lives, HOWEVER that is no excuse for him to have to PAY for her lying and wrong doings!

Hootie