• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A woman can cheat on you, tell you a child is yours when it's not and then keep you on the hook for 18 years even after you prove it's not your child.

If he takes on that responsibility without verification then he maintains that responsibility. I do agree that should the actual bio father be found then it should be an automatic transfer of responsibility. But as a general rule, if you take on the responsibility it is yours.
That's BS in a marriage. Completely. Because the woman has broken a 'contract'. She has morally done wrong, she has cheated.
 
I don't know. I guess mom will have to live with and be responsible for her bad and dishonest decisions. If she can't meet a certain standard of living for the child then the state can take it. An innocent person should not be financially punished for 18 years because he made the mistake of assuming his partner wasn't a cheater and a liar. Why is the victimization of men okay? Maybe random men should be selected to be forced to pay for these children. It would be just as fair.
The kids is not his. He didnt produce it. How is it any different then than when male (or female) parent dies? If public assistance is needed, it is available. For single parents of either sex (and for couples really).
 

The fake father can pay for the child that he accepted to take care of...

... or are you making an argument that supports my Opt-out of Child Support plan?
 
The fake father can pay for the child that he accepted to take care of...

... or are you making an argument that supports my Opt-out of Child Support plan?
No. The real father can pay for his kid.
 
That's BS in a marriage. Completely. Because the woman has broken a 'contract'. She has morally done wrong, she has cheated.
That presumes a marriage or that the pregnancy occurred after the marriage. The OP states no specific time for then the indiscretion occurred. So there may not have been a broken "contract". I was with my now legal wife while she was pregnant with another man's child. I was even in the birthing room. Mind you I was aware of the circumstances. But the point is the pregnancy occurred prior to any marriage. There is no "engagement contract", at least not anymore.
 
Its rare...but it's wrong when it happens

Maybe rare that it ends up in court, but it is certainly not a rare scenario and I’d bet a lot of cases are not known about at least by the poor sucker
 
That presumes a marriage or that the pregnancy occurred after the marriage. The OP states no specific time for then the indiscretion occurred. So there may not have been a broken "contract". I was with my now legal wife while she was pregnant with another man's child. I was even in the birthing room. Mind you I was aware of the circumstances. But the point is the pregnancy occurred prior to any marriage. There is no "engagement contract", at least not anymore.
I guess that could be true. But the cases I've read about were all longer term marriages and nothing even came out about it until a divorce was in the works.

Even before a marriage, she still is in the wrong and the man should not be held responsible. She is aware she had sex with someone else during the period before her pregnancy. And he didnt create that kid. They should go after the actual sperm donor. Yup, not fair, sucks for him but it's 100 times less fair to the ex-dad and the taxpayers, none of whom have any accountability here.
 
But how does that address his point that a man who is not the actual father, but was falsely claimed as such? He's not arguing that all men period should not have to pay if they leave. Only that if he finds out that he's not the bio father (or went through the legal process of adoption) then he should not be responsible. He is addressing a specific situations, not the general.

Given the number of times people have said, "You made it, you are responsible for it" (paraphrased), I think it's a valid question to ask, "Turns out I didn't make it, so why should I still be responsible?" While I don't agree with his logic and conclusion, the question is valid.
Except I was going off a conversation that was started by post #32, which asked if this, men having to pay for children that aren't theirs, was a part of men getting screwed in divorces, not simply a stand alone post in relation to the main conversation. That was the issue I was addressing.

It is wrong in certain cases to have men pay child support for children that are not theirs, but not every case. I have a bigger issue with a case like the sperm donor having to pay it despite having nothing more to do with the child. Particularly if the man raised the child as his for any significant timeframe (I can't help but think of this movie Sperm Bank, and a particular couple in that movie who had a lot of kids).

But most of these situations are not nearly as common as presented here. They should be addressed more fairly, but it will come down to states' rights and discretion of judges in most likelihood. Laws can help to provide some balance, but cannot solve the issue.

What if he knew she was cheating or they had an open relationship? What if he was cheating too? Should those things be part of the decision for whether he pays child support for the child?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
I guess that could be true. But the cases I've read about were all longer term marriages and nothing even came out about it until a divorce was in the works.

Even before a marriage, she still is in the wrong and the man should not be held responsible. She is aware she had sex with someone else during the period before her pregnancy. And he didnt create that kid. They should go after the actual sperm donor. Yup, not fair, sucks for him but it's 100 times less fair to the ex-dad and the taxpayers, none of whom have any accountability here.
Would or should it depend on if the husband knew she had been sleeping with someone else? Is he not also accepting that risk there too? He is staying with her, being with her, especially after a pregnancy becomes known, despite the fact that it could be the child isnt his

In most cases, where the children are found to not be his, especially as a surprise because she cheated or simply didn't tell him she had slept with someone else before him in enough time for a pregnancy, I would agree with going after bio dad. But the circumstances of the case should matter.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Would or should it depend on if the husband knew she had been sleeping with someone else? Is he not also accepting that risk there too? He is staying with her, being with her, especially after a pregnancy becomes known, despite the fact that it could be the child isnt his

In most cases, where the children are found to not be his, especially as a surprise because she cheated or simply didn't tell him she had slept with someone else before him in enough time for a pregnancy, I would agree with going after bio dad. But the circumstances of the case should matter.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
If he knew she was seeing other people, sure. But if she lies about seeing other people or hides it...is he then responsible?
 
If he knew she was seeing other people, sure. But if she lies about seeing other people or hides it...is he then responsible?
In most cases, no. But I think it should be looked at on a case by case basis, what were the circumstances?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Don't have unprotected sex. Don't have sex with strangers. If, as a man, you do these two things, you will not be subject to this OP. And, as a bonus, you won't get an STD, or AIDS. All these pages for nothing. Yeah, smart men and women!!

I think you're confused. You don't need to have sex with a woman for her to be impregnated by another man.
 
The laws regarding custody and child support do apply to both sexes equally. However that doesnt mean the court always applies them equally. OTOH, most family court judges are men....so? Change needs to occur at the bench, not in the laws.

Two things...

First, reasonable women that understand why what is outlined in the OP is wrong are deeply sexy. Thank you.

Second I want to reiterate that I do know that most or all systemic sexism against men is perpetuated by other men.
 
In most cases, no.

Look at what the lawyer said. If the bio dad can't be produced it is unlikely the man will be off the hook even if the mother deceived him and he can prove it with a DNA test.
 
Not a father that now hates him. Or feels no emotional or other connection to him/her beyond financial. He or she is the product of betrayal, lies. I hope that any emotional connection would remain, but you cant make it happen.

You cannot force that on people.


 
Look at what the lawyer said. If the bio dad can't be produced it is unlikely the man will be off the hook even if the mother deceived him and he can prove it with a DNA test.
And I've already said it is wrong in most cases to hold the nonbio dad responsible for child support. Doesnt change that this is a rare and minor issue to fix.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Visitation is not the only criteria. There are many things that factor into joint custody, including logistics...how do you split kids 'evenly' when they need to go to school during the week? Just one ex.

Exactly. It's hard or almost impossible. The primary joint custodian is favored here and that is usually the mother. I literally went though a divorce and custody proceedings in Florida. Forgive me if my wordage was confusing. It's also probably worth noting that those proceedings were almost 10 years ago.
 
Last edited:
Maybe rare that it ends up in court, but it is certainly not a rare scenario and I’d bet a lot of cases are not known about at least by the poor sucker

Yep.
 
And I've already said it is wrong in most cases to hold the nonbio dad responsible for child support. Doesnt change that this is a rare and minor issue to fix.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk

If we're in agreement that this shouldn't happen then we have nothing to disagree about.
 
I think you're confused. You don't need to have sex with a woman for her to be impregnated by another man.
But you do have to have sex with her for her to claim it is yours.

Her: honey, we're pregnant! You're going to be a father!

Him: How? We haven't had sex yet!

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
Back
Top Bottom