- Joined
- Feb 1, 2006
- Messages
- 20,120
- Reaction score
- 16,169
- Location
- Cheyenne, WY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
MONTREAL - A father has been ordered to pay child support to his ex-wife despite results of DNA testing that found three of the four children he helped raise are not biologically his, a Quebec Superior Court ruled.
The man learned the shocking news after he demanded DNA testing when he and his wife of 16 years separated in April 2010.
Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules | Canada | News | Toronto Sun
I have absolutely no sympathy for this man. Married for sixteen years, raising four children for over a decade-- and he demands a paternity test when he gets a divorce? I think about the message that sends his children and all I can think is "**** this guy". And I reject the notion that, again, after a decade of raising three children that he is anything but their real father.
Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules | Canada | News | Toronto Sun
I have absolutely no sympathy for this man. Married for sixteen years, raising four children for over a decade-- and he demands a paternity test when he gets a divorce? I think about the message that sends his children and all I can think is "**** this guy". And I reject the notion that, again, after a decade of raising three children that he is anything but their real father.
Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules | Canada | News | Toronto Sun
I have absolutely no sympathy for this man. Married for sixteen years, raising four children for over a decade-- and he demands a paternity test when he gets a divorce? I think about the message that sends his children and all I can think is "**** this guy". And I reject the notion that, again, after a decade of raising three children that he is anything but their real father.
Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules | Canada | News | Toronto Sun
I have absolutely no sympathy for this man. Married for sixteen years, raising four children for over a decade-- and he demands a paternity test when he gets a divorce? I think about the message that sends his children and all I can think is "**** this guy". And I reject the notion that, again, after a decade of raising three children that he is anything but their real father.
I don't see the problem here. :shrug:
If the guy isn't the father of the kids, he just isn't the father of the kids. Acting in the role of a father doesn't change that.
Just a couple of points of clarification. Firstly, the husband testified that he was aware the wife had affairs. Secondly, the youngest child, his only son, is biologically his - his three oldest, daughters, are not biologically his - thus, he was still if not in love with her, in bed with her, well after the infidelity and thus accepting of her lifestyle. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, this is an order for "child support" not spousal support - the children have only known one father and they should not be punished for the sins of their parents, particularly the mother's.
Just a couple of points of clarification. Firstly, the husband testified that he was aware the wife had affairs. Secondly, the youngest child, his only son, is biologically his - his three oldest, daughters, are not biologically his - thus, he was still if not in love with her, in bed with her, well after the infidelity and thus accepting of her lifestyle. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, this is an order for "child support" not spousal support - the children have only known one father and they should not be punished for the sins of their parents, particularly the mother's.
It's not the fault of the children, but it's not the fault of the man either that he isn't the father of the those other kids. BTW, so what is the responsibility for the biological father of those children, nothing?
He is not the biological father of three of his four children. The court is demanding, rightfully, that he pay child support for those three anyway because they are still his children.
.
Aside from the fact that we've had this argument before, you do realize that this news story is the courts acting according to my views and not yours, right?
He is not the biological father of three of his four children. The court is demanding, rightfully, that he pay child support for those three anyway because they are still his children.
Somehow, people have gotten the impression that I don't approve of the court's decision. This is not the case.
Pretty much, yeah. Which is worse, finding out that your wife has cheated on you and had children by other men, or finding out that your wife had children by other men and those men are now legally entitled to steal them from you?
Just because a court ordered it, doesn't make it right does it?
Again I'll ask, what is the responsibilty then of the biological fathers? Nothing? Do you think that is correct?
The man thought he was their bioilogical father and it turns out he isn't. Is that his fault?
The husband testified that he knew about the affairs, however, he also thought he was the biological father of all the children.
It's not the fault of the children, but it's not the fault of the man either that he isn't the father of the those other kids. BTW, so what is the responsibility for the biological father of those children, nothing?
Pretty much, yeah. Which is worse, finding out that your wife has cheated on you and had children by other men, or finding out that your wife had children by other men and those men are now legally entitled to steal them from you?
And if any of those fathers comes forward, they will be able to steal the children away anyway. In almost all court rulings the biological parents have rights over the non-biological.
There was an interesting case I read a while back.
Wife got pregnant, had twins (iirc), then divorced her husband, who was the legal father and moved in with the biological father.
The twins were still infants.
How would you view that?
Yes. The biological "fathers" should have no responsibility here-- and, correspondingly and more importantly, no rights.
No. Is it his childrens' fault? No. They shouldn't lose their father because of their mother's adultery-- and if he were a man, he would do right by his children regardless.
Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules | Canada | News | Toronto Sun
I have absolutely no sympathy for this man. Married for sixteen years, raising four children for over a decade-- and he demands a paternity test when he gets a divorce? I think about the message that sends his children and all I can think is "**** this guy". And I reject the notion that, again, after a decade of raising three children that he is anything but their real father.
Yes, but that is because of the nonsense people are putting forward in this thread, that the biological father matters more than the father who gave them his name.
I'd say it depends on which man's name is on the birth certificate. Mother chooses the hearth, father chooses the children.
I don't think this is unprecedented. I believe laws in all states enforce that any children born in a marriage are automatically assumed (by the law) to be the husband's unless exception is taken at birth. I'm not certain of that, but I believe it to be true.
Nice try, JERK. 'Course she is, too . . .
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?