I'm getting different answers...Do you know the correct one?
2007-01-05 10:54:08 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
No- she is not responsible for the support of a child that is not hers. However, if the father is in arrears--the state will try to intercept your joint tax refund. You will need to file an injured spouse form with your taxes so you can retain your portion.
2007-01-06 14:13:02 · answer #1 · answered by Cherie 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
depends on the state. here in michigan this guy lived with a woman for 7 or 8 years, she sued him for child support and WON!!!! these 2 kids weren't his, their biological father pays and has been paying but now she's got this moron paying too. lol wish i would have got into the "game". (just kidding). no i couldn't breed for profit. but these people do make me sooooooooooooooooooooooo sick. that's why i wouldn't/nor have i ever dated a guy with kids. not worth the trouble, headache, etc................................... honestly, she shouldn't have married a guy who had kids. a man who already has baggage is going to be nothing but trouble, she can deny it, but i've seen it happen to my friends and my step-sisters (yes step-sisters, lol) there's some history, glad i didn't have to learn the hard way though.
2007-01-05 11:06:10 · answer #2 · answered by vanessa w 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The wife is entitled pay whomever she pleases. It's a free country. The wife is not obligated to pay for a child that is not hers. If you asking whether or not they can include your income in making a determination regarding your spouse's obligation, I believe that varies state to state.
2007-01-05 11:00:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nope - she is not responsible for where her hubby dips his whickie in his spare time.
If she is still with said husband then she will ultimately end up bearing part of the burden simply due to comingling of funds - but individually obligated absolutely not.
2007-01-05 11:13:20 · answer #4 · answered by Susie D 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Legally No but the husband is legally obligated whether the wife likes it or not.
2007-01-05 13:24:45 · answer #5 · answered by Angelz 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ah, but most honorable weed hopper... Consider this: should my wife go out and sign for a new car without discussing it with me first, I am STILL equally liable for the debt incurred. We ARE after all, a "team." In good times, in bad, in wealth and in poverty, in sickness and in health, until death do us part (or the divorce court rules -- whichever comes first.) I married my wife and two years later got hit for bills that she and her first husband had rung up about ten years ealier. She thought that HE'd taken care of this. Now, it's on me.
2007-01-05 11:03:27 · answer #6 · answered by Doc 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
why should she have to pay for a kid that had while not with her. if the marriage is over than of course not, but even if they stayed marryed its not her kid. this is the baby's momma's way of trying to get money out of her. also these are just my beleifs don't know if they are true
2007-01-05 11:03:48 · answer #7 · answered by soapqueen1792 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
absolutely not. yes by all the means the husband has to pay, but why make the wife if its not even her's?
2007-01-05 11:01:45 · answer #8 · answered by missbp1982 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope, she is not. My brother in laws ex tried this and didn't get very far.
2007-01-05 10:56:20 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
hell no it is not her kid she is not finacially liable.
2007-01-05 10:56:21 · answer #10 · answered by Venessa B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋