A man believes that a child is his for 8+ years and he has no reasons to suspect otherwise. After Dna proves he's not the father, should he have to continue support payments because of the # of years it took to discover the truth? I personally don't think so, how about you?
2007-11-06 05:32:25 · 19 answers · asked by Test 2 in Family & Relationships ➔ Other - Family & Relationships
If this man in turn abondons the child, will you blame him or consider how he feels? In what way do you feel that the woman suffers, after all she is the deceptor?
2007-11-09 02:50:04 · update #1
HECK NO. She should be charged with fraud and be forced to pay back all the money PLUS interest PLUS emotional damages.
2007-11-08 05:11:25 · answer #1 · answered by JoannaB3 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No the real father should be supporting his child, not some other man. And why did it take so long to get a DNA test done anyway? If there is doubt that someone else could be the father, then test them & make sure.
Now this kid is 8 & thinks this man is his father, does he know now that he isn't? I bet that just broke his heart, now he is wondering who is real father is & about his other half of his DNA.
2007-11-06 13:38:58 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh definately NOT!!! If he is not the father then he should not have to finish paying. I think before you are forced to pay child support they should automatically take a DNA test to determine if the child is even yours. If they would do that then the guy wouldn't have wasted his money for 8 years to find out the kid is not his. That is just sad. But i think that the guy should not have to continue making payments.
2007-11-06 14:00:51 · answer #3 · answered by daughtryrocks 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No! And the law states No also. A man is only liable for children he fathers. Any other children not being his is not his responsibility. This is the law. However, there are alot of men out there who, after thinking a child is theirs for so many years and then finding out it isn't, decides to just leave things the way they are. He learns to love and support the child the same way he would if it were his biological child. However, there is no law saying he has to.
2007-11-06 13:55:49 · answer #4 · answered by SeaMistress 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No! I don't think he should have to pay and the courts shouldn't make him pay if the dna proves he ain't the father. But on the other hand he has acted like the father for 8 yrs and if his name is on the birth certificate he might feel like its his duty to love and take care of child but that should be up the man.
2007-11-06 13:37:43 · answer #5 · answered by mxwife38 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If he didn't know that the child was not his then no he should not have to pay child support and I think he should be given back what he has paid. The child support order was only because the mother told him or he assumed he was the father of the child. Of course if the child was not his and he was going to be with her and agreed to help raise the child why should he have to pay child support.
2007-11-06 14:42:04 · answer #6 · answered by honestspeaking 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Noone is not legally obligated to pay child support for a child that is not biologically theirs. Whether a person chooses to pay it or not is at his own accord, but it would not be a matter of the court unless the persons involved had a written agreement with minimal/no loop holes and one person negates on their part of the written contract.
2007-11-06 13:40:46 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
If it's not his child then the law can't make him pay. However, if he has been raising this child for 8 years I would hope he would continue to be the child's father whether or not he is paying.
2007-11-06 13:37:32 · answer #8 · answered by Leslie G 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No I don't think he should and he should get some compensation from the mother for the years he paid child support and the child wasn't his.
2007-11-06 13:37:11 · answer #9 · answered by peaches6 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, of course not. Unless he knew the child wasn't his but adopted it anyway, if it's discovered he's not the father then he should not be held responsible.
2007-11-06 13:37:14 · answer #10 · answered by . 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋