January 28, 2008
-
Child Support
A man must pay child support on a child that he did not father. An appeals court agreed with a lower court that the man must pay child support.
The man was married to the girl’s mother. He thought she was his child. The girl was born in 1997. The couple divorced in 1999.
The man tested for paternity after his ex-wife made statements indicating he wasn’t the father. She is now 10-years-old. The court ruled the man must pay child support because it was in the best interest of the child. Here is the link: Link (Courts will often not even look at the DNA evidence in these cases but only look at what is in the best interest of the child).
Should the man have to pay child support for a child that he did not father?
Comments (121)
no
Yes, if he was paying for the child at one time.
Yes – depending. No matter what stupid mistakes the mother made, or what the blood tests say… She is still his step-daughter AT LEAST. He married her mother. However, The mother should NOT get child support from the stepfather and the father at the same time.
if no one else can, then i guess so.
Nope.
No.
No.
It’s in the best interests of the child that Donald Trump pay her child support, but that doesn’t make it right.
If he’s not the father he shouldn’t be forced to pay.
If he’s not the father and pays anyway he has my highest respect. But that’s a choice he has to make, and cannot be forced upon him by a court.
This is another reason I’m a libertarian: if the government makes you do things because the government thinks its the right thing to do, it takes away your ability to do good things on your own. If it was federally mandated that everyone had to work in a soup kitchen on holidays, it wouldn’t be a good deed anymore. Just get the government to step back and lets see people do things themselves.
NO. That’s ridiculous…
I’m kind of torn on this.
He is not the girl’s father, so he *shouldn’t* have to pay for the child.
On the other hand, who is the father then? If he is not in the girl’s life and never has been, then by all means, this man should pay for child support. He acted as a father to the child, and although the article doesn’t say anything about this, I’m assuming he was married to the wife before the child was born. He may not be the father, but he is the girl’s dad. I can see why they would make him pay child support.
Absolutely not, they would never allowed this man any paternity rights because he is not the real father. In a custody case this would be held against the man. But here were it would benefit him that he not the father they find him to be a convenient source of income.
It is not the child’s fault that mom is a slut, but the man is simply not the father. Taking his money for this child is nothing short of theft.
To add to that: if the girl was born before they were married and the DNA says it is not his, or if the real father is in the girl’s life, then no. This man shouldn’t be held responsible.
(sorry for the double post)
@Saphira07 - You said it all.
no
No way! If she can’t keep her legs together and was cheating on him…she should take responsibility!!!
No way, that’s highway robbery. Why don’t the members of the court pay for the child out of their own pockets if they’re so concerned rather than forcing a private individual of no realtion to the child to? What a scam.
No, that is ridiculous. Go after the man who fathered the child for financial support. If a man chooses to support a child who is knowingly not his, fine, but he should not be forced to.
Yes, in this case. For one thing, if he doubted that he was the child’s father, he should have been tested when she was born. For another thing, who else does she know as her father? I’m sure she was treated like his daughter before he knew the truth, so he should continue as if she was his. Obviously, she could have been his child so he must have been having relations with the mother. What difference does the DNA make at this point?
Since I am not a judge nor jury, I will express my PERSONAL opinion on the matter. No, he should NOT pay child support BECAUSE he should not have divorced the mom; they should get back together and live as a family and, further, the kid SHOULD be his!
Oh, but if the mom CHEATED on her husband to have this child, she should be locked up for life! I’d rather have druggies running around our streets than cheaters!
If the biological father of the child is unable for some reason or another to take that responsibility, then yes, he should continue to pay child support as he is the only father that child has ever known. Hopefully he will also take on the visitation as well, and not reject the child out of hand.
IF however, the biological father is out there, then HE should be the one taking that responsibility, NOT the former husband of the child’s mother.
It’s a very awkward decision all the way around. Either way, the girl already feels rejected because he took the matter to court to quit paying support. Unfortunately, the court cannot force him to be nice to the girl, even though the mess isn’t her fault.
Did the child call the man daddy? Then, maybe. Was there talk that the guy was going to adopt the child? Then, yes. I see nothing wrong with it.
Absolutely not.
this has happened before. it is based, legally, on a status relationship — he ‘acted’ as her father, and so he has a parental (or paternal) obligation to her. it’s more of a contract theory than anything, but it’s hardly a ground-breaking decision — we have lots of caselaw along this line.
ok…the girl in question is 10 years old – born in 1997.
The couple was divorced in 1999….when the girl was 2 years old.
Now, the question isn’t if the man should pay child support…or if the child support should be reduced…
…or even if the courts decision was correct or not.
The bigger question is why they got the divorce in 1999. Find that out…and the decision may be easier.
I think he should pay, as he has helped raise the girl as her father. However, I don’t think he should legally have to, as he probably has not adopted her and she is not legally his child.
If he legally has to pay, I’m betting they are also mandating that he has rights to petition for custody as well. Because that makes the most sense.
Otherwise, it’s a single man and a single mother. The man will make 25% more than the single mother, and be able to work more, but she will be supporting two people. But it’s not as simple as that. He does owe that girl something, as he is the only father she has ever known.
He’s pretty much like almost every other divorce dad. Leave the kids with mom and give her as little help as possible.
I am going with a big no for this one Dan
No, but I think it would be nice if he did, especially because he’s been in the girls life for 10 years.
It’s not his child, he shouldn’t have to pay for child support at all. Whether or not he does should be by his own choice, and it shouldn’t be held against him if he does not.
They’re not even married, anymore, so I don’t think I even consider him the girls’ step-father, either. That’s ridiculous, I agree with ChrisRusso and UR_MUSE.
No, he shouldn’t have to.
Though it’s pretty fucked up that he wouldn’t want to support a child he raised as his daughter for 10 years. Blood or not, that’s still his fucking kid. That little girl is going to have some serious issues later.
No- the REAL father must pay.
@sunnymitsu
You’d rather have drug-addicted people who live on the street, gathering filth and snorting crack in the open, than someone cheat on someone else? Something they’ve done in their personal life which doesn’t show outwardly? That’s a little harsh, girl. Don’t you think so?
Rawr, I mean
@SunnyMitsu
RAWR the stupid reply thing isn’t working. whatever./
So wait, if he had stayed with the mother and child until she was in her teens, divorced and had to pay child support, why does it matter who was the sperm donor? For the years they were together he was taking care of her. Now he suddenly has no ties to her because of DNA? Seriously? Would he disown her if they had never divorced?
I’m all for rights for fathers as they usually get the shit end of the stick, but this isn’t what I mean. God forbid if the child was adopted, no one’s child, to hell with her for not being biologically his? Damn.
Only if he wants to. He shouldn’t be forced to pay for a child he didn’t father.
man that would suck… no he shouldnt have to… why? he aint the babys daddy!
I’m sick of these money-hungry biotches who think child-support is their god-given right just because they popped a baby out. I’m sure it’s hard being a single mother, but it’s not impossible. My parents divorced when I was 4. My dad was ordered to pay child support, but my mom tore up the checks. She wanted to make it on her own and she did.
That’s why stories like this make me so pissed that a man is forced to pay for a child that isn’t even his, when the reason is most likely because he was cheated on! I don’t think it’s kosher to divorce someone, and then bone them for the next 18 years simply because you can.
that is why folks…you do not have a relationship with SINGLE MOMS!!!!!
STAY AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@CrystalTears24 - Actually, what you said brings up an interesting question.
How would this be handled if the child was adopted and the parents divorced?
It is almost the exact same situation, except here there’s at least one biological parent.
Wasn’t this man put on the birth certificate as this girl’s father? Then she is legally his.
Maybe I’m off on things, but to me having those names on the birth certificate is the same as adopting a child as your own- legally you are that child’s parent, biological or not.
nope
He accepted responsibility, then yes, he should.
He should want to pay since he raised her as his own, however legally the courts should not force him to pay. Most of the times in situations like this I have seen men who not only were forced to pay, but were also denied the rights to see the child because they were not the biologial father. That my friends is bullshit.
Hells no
absolutely not, once he found out the child wasn’t his, that’s it, he should be able to walk away from it all if he chooses to
@Saphira07 - Right, and I’m betting that he was placed on the girl’s birth certificate as the father, but we don’t know that for sure. That would make her legally his. I understand the emotional complications of caring for a child that you didn’t father, but unfortunately, even if he wasn’t aware of that aspect, he probably would be paying for child support anyway.
I really feel badly for this little girl. She had nothing to do with her mother being a slut and has to endure this.
@SunnyMitsu - Whew….what world are you living in?!
In an ideal world I would wake up with bird and mice making my house spotless, and being rich for no damn reason. Not everyone stays married. Great for your convictions, but given his wife cheated on him and duped him, you think that working on that marriage is a good thing? I think not.
I haven’t figured out why we should support paternity fraud. The woman should be honest with the potential father.
The same law applies in Texas. It’s based upon the fact that you could have/should have contested paternity at some point but didn’t.
If the guy had no idea that his fiance/girlfriend was sleeping around, then why should he be penalized.
Well, it’s just lovely to see a man not give a shit about a girl he’s known ten years, but then again, the mom had sex with…GASP…multiple men, so she is obviously a slut. Best to just abort…10 years postpartum.
Thats a tough one. As a male I would feel responsible, but I guess we know why they got divorced.
“Wasn’t this man put on the birth certificate as this girl’s father? Then she is legally his.
Maybe
I’m off on things, but to me having those names on the birth
certificate is the same as adopting a child as your own- legally you
are that child’s parent, biological or not.”
Because what the woman did was commit fraud. She knew that the child most likely wasn’t this man’s, yet she stuck it to him anyway. In the case of adoption, he would go into it knowing that the child wasn’t his biologically, but in this case, he was hugely misled.
It shouldn’t be about money. If he loves this little girl as his own and wants to pay, then let him. But if he doesn’t, then the bio dad should be found and ordered to, not him.
no. It’s not his kid!
In the state of Washington, if you date a single mom for a year…then you become responsible for that child and if you break up…then you would pay child support!!!
how crazy is that!
If he treated and loved her for 10yrs, like shes his how can he fall out of love and not want to support her now?
Fuck NO! The guy is innocent in this matter, find the ass hole that fathered the kid if the mom needs child support.
Can’t we just put 10 year olds to work in sweat shops, so they can take care of themselves already?! SHEESH.
No… It sounds to me like it would be in the best interest of the child to have a different mother…
No, but at the same time… if he thought that this girl was his daughter, and loved her and treated her like his daughter, it would be pretty douchey to all of a sudden say “I’m not the father, why should I be responsible for her?” now…
No, what kind of crock of bullshit is this?
If my girlfriend has a daughter and we broke up, am I supposed to pay child support if I bought him some clothes and a PS3?
Nonsense (btw above scenario is 100% hypothetical)
bought her*
very simple, no.
If anyone rally wants to know the law on this it based old case law that assumes that any child born to a marred couple is the husband’s child. If they want to use old case law, then great, but go all out and be consistent about it then. The woman was unfaithful. By old case law, back when divorces needed a cause, she could be divorced, it would be her fault and she would get no support. The child could go to the father as he was concidered the damaged party.
If he did not want the child then it was his choice to pay child support. While still unfair, this old way at least has semblance of justice. This guy just had his income taken because the child, not his child, needs money. There are a lot of childern out in this world that need money.
Given the law, then sure. I’d say, he should then:
1. Sue the mother for the child support he is paying.
2. The mother in turn would then try to find the actual father of the child and make him pay for child support.
3. Everyone gets what they deserve.
No, it doesn’t seem fair for him to have to. Then again, since when is anything fair?
Shouldn’t the mother already possess an exorbitant amount of money, which usually comes with the occupation of being a whore?
If he was accepting of the child as his daughter at one time, you’d think they’d have a bond and he’d be glad to pay it.
Sunnymitsu, you can’t seriously mean this: “I’d rather have druggies running around our streets than cheaters!”
There are many people who have cheated on an SO.
Seriously, though, druggies are at much higher risk for violating someone else’s rights than cheaters. Cheaters may make you feel bad, but they’re not using force against you.
Nope
All I know is that 10-years-old should be written 10 years old.
Purely on the basis of his earlier supposition of fatherhood: Definately not.
The mitigating factors here was that the couple were once married.
@JimiRy - “If he was accepting of the child as his daughter at one time, you’d think they’d have a bond and he’d be glad to pay it.”
Voluntary monetary support is very different from forced support regardless of his expressed opinion of the matter.
He shouldn’t be forced to pay but I would think he’d think of the kid as his own so would want to care for the child but he shouldn’t be obligated since the biological father is the one that should be paying for the kid.
He shouldn’t be ordered to, but since he raised her as his daughter I think he should make that decision to pay on his own if he loves that child.
You know, this has gotten out of hand. If that woman decided to have that child expecting him to pay for it, even though it wasn’t his, she is not up to the standards our society have placed upon themselves.
Why doesn’t she get the real child’s father to pay for this legally, while the other father can pay if he feels like it
The law says he must. Normally, I would say no because he wouldn’t be under any legal obligation to pay, but they have said he must pay. Heart-wise, I don’t know how attached he is to this little girl. I would find it very difficult not to support her in some way, but that is me. Maybe the situation is different in their household.
I agree with ChrisRusso. In fact, it is in the best interests of the child for Bill Gates and Warren Buffet to pay child support!
This is a stupid ruling! Unfortunately, he owes the child NOTHING.
Legally, he should not be required to pay. If he is mandated to pay, then he should also have right to custody over the child as well.
No.
NOOO, I BIG N O.
The justice system in the United States of New Jersey(being a Jersey resident) is completely bogus.
We put people in jail over not paying their child support yet we let murderers and rapists out on bail and finally imprison them after the 3rd time they are caught. Well…that is how New Jersey rolls because everything is ran by corrupt politicians. If you look, New Jersey is in a billion dollar deficit yet all the states around us are not. This state is such a waste.
@QuantumStorm - Legally, but this is New Jersey we are talking about. Nothing is done legally here.
no
No
And If I was the father I would refuse to pay.
Once you’ve made that connection from birth taking care of a child…especially thinking it is yours, it’s natural to WANT to keep supporting the child out of love for the child. Depending on the woman in this case, if she isn’t a caring mother and wanting whats best for her daughter, the man should be able to say WHAT the support should go to. I mean if this woman wants the money to buy things SHE wants and not actually buy what her daughter needs, then the man should be able to deem what the money is to be spent on. That woulod be the more fair thing, but then fairness is over rated.
I don’t think he should have to, go after the REAL father. DNA should matter.
NO! It’s not his kid, so why does he owe her anything?
that’s what you get for having a penis?
Chances are if he thought the baby was his in the first place, he is on the birth certificate, therefore the legal father. But the ho should find out who the baby daddy is and go after him instead.
Uhh… so where’s the biological father in all this?
He should not be forced to pay child support for a child that isn’t his.
@trunthepaige - Nice points. I’m still sort of torn, but totally see what you’re saying.
NO!
NO. we’re actually in the middle of this with my husband’s ex. it’s a friggin pain in the ass.
@huginn - Yeah, my response was way too hypothetical and subjective to be taken seriously… guess I was just trying my best to come up with a definite answer
Truththepaige: Absolutely not, they would never allowed this man any paternity rights because he is not the real father.
MyJudas: … as he probably has not adopted her and she is not legally his child.
The truth of both comments above depends on how state law reads. In my state a child born in marriage is legally the husbands child regardless of who the biological father is. This makes the husband legally responsible for the child and therefore requires child support payments and potential for custody in the case of divorce.
I believe the only time the bio-father would be sought out would be if the family became involved in the child welfare system and the county was looking for suitable kinship placement or there was a termination of parental rights order issued.
The mother’s a slut, and yet the guy pays? That’s ridiculous.
There was another case recently here in the US, in which a woman who received a sperm donation from the sperm bank years later sued the alleged donor to pay child support for her seventeen year old son. The court declared that the man did indeed have to pay child support, and rejected the mans request for a paternity test to verify that he was indeed the father. Apparently it would be ‘traumatizing’ for the seventeen year-old guy.So, guys out there, never donate sperm. It’s a lifelong commitment.
I think it’s all situational. The guy was only married to the mother for 2 years after the child was born. Did he have visitation over the girl when he was divorced from the wife until now? If yes, then he should have to pay because it’s his child in the sence that he visited her and treated her like his daughter. If not, then no, becuase 1. It’s not his kid and 2. He didn’t raise her past 2 years of age, so he’s not her ‘father’.
Heck no! This isn’t his child and he shouldn’t have to pay because it is in the best interest of the child….what?! Here’s a thought…find the REAL father and make HIM pay child support in the best interest of the child! I think the man either needs to appeal the decision or something because that is just crap.
did he keep contact with the child during those 8 years? does he want to maintain a parental relationship with the child? if so, then yes.
if he had nothing to do with the child in question after the divorce, then there is no reason for him to pay.
in our state, if you as a man, sign the birth certificate then you are acknowledging that you take responsibility as the father of the child – so yes.
I have a family member who cheated and came home pregnant. Her partner took her back and has raised the baby as his own for years. When they split up a few years ago – she tried to keep him from getting custody of the child on the grounds that they little boy was not his biologically. The judge gave him custody anyway due to the fact that he had signed the birth certificate and had raised the child.
No…
Ditto ChrisRusso.
I guess I’d have to see the way the law is written before I make my mind up completely, but it’s very discouraging that these people make up their mind regardless of the facts. If they feel so moved by the best interest of the child, they can pay child support themselves.
Poor Kid! What an F’ed up situation the mother has put everyone in.
He was her father for the 2 years after she was born that they were still married, and if they hadn’t gotten divorced he would still be acting as her father. I don’t see why genetic makeup trumps real-life bonding.
Why do children have children? I wish I could support the girl. How sad for her! To be haggled over. oh my. What a travesty of our humanity. God bless her. Lets support marriage edu and faith based things…to help us become people who can abstain until we can be faithful in a relationship….and learn to become happy…..and solve the majority of our social ills. We can do this.
This sucks for that little girl, but if that’s not her biological father and he doesn’t want to be part of her life they why should he be forced to pay child support. I agree with the people who say that this is wrong, what’s next will we have a child support tax that everybody is forced to pay? We need to draw the line somewhere…
HELL NO HE SHOULD NOT..Does that women have no shame…
Poor guy, its not legally his obligation to do so..What is wrong with the system.
Go after the guys that ARE the father and make him pay!!!!!
If its in the best interest of the child.
With this kind of “logic”, why can’t they grab any man off the street and decide it’s “in the best interests of the child” for him to support her. And I agree with Paige.
Yes, for the child’s sake. Besides, he must have loved her. Why would that stop with a test that proved she wasn’t blood related? One would think he’d still care for the girl, enough to at least give the pittance that is child support.
I thought the only time you have to pay is when it is biologically your child that you helped produce. No he should be forced by law to pay.
A resounding NO
Well, here’s the thing - it was wrong that his ex-wife wasn’t upfront with him about the daughter not being his. He had a right to know, he took care of the child because he thought it was his (as he should have done). Now, I kind of have mixed feelings about this because I feel like for those ten years he took care of what he thought to be his daughter, and now that he knows she isn’t – he’s just going to abandon her, which I don’t believe is right. So like I said, a little mixed feelings on this one.
No way. The man should not have to take care of a child that is not his. At least, not without choice. If the guy wants to, then yes. Let him. But it’s not fair. But I guess thats the US for ya.
no. Child support was designed for the natural father to pay for the rearage of the child(ren).
First the woman cheats on him in order to have a child during thier marriage.
Then adding insult to injury, he is forced to pay for the other mans child?
Come on folks get a grip, it’s really a no brainer. In fact, she should pay every cent of child support that he paid to her as well as getting charged with fraud for collecting on that child support to begin with.
No. . but you would think after him raising a child of his own for 2 years he would have an attachment to her and want to be in her life. . including paying the child support
no he should not me made to though i do agree i dont see why he would not want to i would think finding the biological father would be fairly simple unless the mom was just a really big slut
I don’t think he should be made to pay child support, but I would think that if he thought the little girl was his all along that he would want to see that she was well taken care of. Once the child is yours in your mind, I would think it would be hard to not think of her always as yours.
not at all… thats ridiculous… the slut mom should probably find out who the dad is and make HIM pay… its HIS swimmers… not the responsibility of some man that thought he liked a woman enough to marry her… doesnt make the kid his…
heck no
no. it’s not even his kid. if the lady really wants child support she should just talk to the real father.
He shouldn’t have to pay child support from the court. However, he should do it because he loves her and because they have built a father daughter relationship.