I'm asking this because my sister is in this exact situation.
5 years ago she was drugged and date raped by a friend of the family. She did not report it to the police.
1 month later she found out that she was pregnant and decided to keep the baby. Her current boyfriend at the time stood by her decision. They are now married, he signed the birth certificate, the child is 4 years old and thinks my sister's husband is her natural father. They have decided to never tell the child otherwise.
So, I guess my question is...if it was ever found out, could there be legal problems? What do you think about this in an ethical sense? Does a rapist deserve to know that he fathered a child or do you think he forfeited all his rights when he committed the crime?
Thanks!
2007-08-29 13:33:39 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Edited to add: I have no intentions of telling anyone myself, certainly not the child as I agree it would bring her nothing but heartache. I meant like if the truth were to come out under some medical emergency (highly rare but, possible).
Also there is no possibility that anyone else could be the father. She had not slept with anyone including her husband (current boyfriend at the time) for over 1 year. The rapist is 100% the biological father.
My sister and her husband got married when she was 7 months pregnant. So, when the baby was born and the husband signed the birth certificate he was her spouse.
I don't know if that changes anything. But, I thought I should add that.
2007-08-29 16:05:49 · update #1
As much as I personally agree with your sister's decision, the fact is the rapist very well may be the father. His legal rights as a parent are unaffected by his crime. (Your question omits two important facts. First, whether your sister and her [now] husband had intercourse prior to your sister becoming pregnant. From the question, I assume they did not. Second, whether your sister and brother-in-law were married when your niece was born. If so, the laws of your sister's state probably make your brother-in-law legally the father. From the question, I again assume that is not the case.)
As the father, he has legal rights. Technically, your brother-in-law's and sister's putting your brother-in-law's name on the birth certificate may be considered a form of fraud in your state. HOWEVER, it would be political suicide for a prosecutor to bring charges. I don't think anything would happen to your sister and brother-in-law. The concern is that the biological father would find out and sue for paternity.
It is up to your sister and brother-in-law whether they tell your niece the truth. You should not get involved. It is better for everyone if you get used to the idea and the practice of not mentioning this to anyone.
2007-08-29 14:43:05 · answer #1 · answered by mcmufin 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not entirely sure, but I think she made a big mistake by not getting the bastard criminally charged as a rapist. If he were found guilty as a rapist, then he would never have any rights associated with that child. In addition to not having the right to see that child he would still have to pay child support to your sister.
However, if he finds out now that he has a child he may turn around and say that there was no rape and that your sister was keeping the child from him. So yes, there are legal problems that may arise.
If she tells the rapist that he is the father more than likely he won't want to have anything to do with that child. But if he does, then things may get very messy. Your sister can have family court make the rapist take a DNA to prove the paternity and then she will get financial support from him.
Your sister should tell the child the whole story after he/she is mature enough to handle that info.
So, yes, I believe the rapist not only deserves to know about the baby, but should be financially accountable for the child.
2007-08-29 14:00:46 · answer #2 · answered by wow 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If your sister was sexually active at the time of the assault, then the child could be the boyfriends. Has she had a DNA test to determine the truth?
More importantly, would your sister feel better if she found out the child was the the biological offspring of her rapist? I can't believe that would be good for her mental well being.
It certainly would do the child no good to find out if she was the product of a rape.
Your sister may want to consult a psychologist for guidance - how this question/answer would affect both her and her daughter.
2007-08-29 14:07:00 · answer #3 · answered by Boots 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Think of what is best for the child. My friend's wife was pretty loose and wild. He was infertile. But she calmed down after 3 children and they have the best relationship ever. All the kids look up to and respect him as their father. He was probably looking for someone to bring him a glass of water when he became an old man, so there is always a bit selfishness on all parts. The biological father does have parental rights, should he find out. But it's best to let sleeping dogs lie.
2007-08-29 13:41:18 · answer #4 · answered by obsolete professor 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Hmmm... Does a criminal have the right to gain profit from his criminal actions... I would think no.
OTOH, the CHILD has the right to know if there are genetic problems ahead because of this ahole. You can also make him pay child support for the next 14 years. So you might want to consider it on those grounds.
2007-08-29 13:53:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
hell no he should have no rights and in fact he should have additional charges brought against him in the name of the child. i don't know what charges but he shouldn't be taking up space on the earth for those kind of crimes anyway and that would end all arguments about it
the only reason that rapist should find out is to pay child support
2007-08-29 13:39:04 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
in many states there's a statute of barriers on rape, after 9 years it could have been impossible to can charge him besides. we could desire to continually additionally remember that what the ninth step truly says is "made direct amends to such people* everywhere attainable, different than whilst to accomplish that might injure them or others". for that reason the guy needless to say harmed the lady, and a apology isn't the comparable as an "amend", an apology only makes the guy at fault sense extra advantageous whilst doing no longer something for the injured occasion. for my section I consider you that a rapist could desire to unquestionable pay for his crime, and by way of brazenly confessing he gave her the suited suited to act on the information as she chosen, if it were the countless women people i understand the guy could desire to count huge type himself fortunate that she did no longer only music him down and shoot or geld him.
2016-10-03 09:36:41 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The rapist did not give your sister a choice.
Why extend any sort of recognition to that scumbag?
2007-08-29 13:50:49 · answer #8 · answered by Ray G 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I dont think they would want to put the child in harms way by exposing him to this animal. He has no rights to this child. And he/ she doesnt need to know the truth. All it will do is ruin their life.
2007-08-29 13:39:47 · answer #9 · answered by Gary S 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Rapists lose any rights.
Over and above THAT---how would that fact in your sister's life EVER come out????
2007-08-29 13:42:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋