Does a father have a legal obligation if not his?

[Mathematician]

Came across this gem of feminist rhetoric:

Who

Now, a cotton-wool swab with a bit of saliva, plus a small fee, less than £200, can settle the matter. At a stroke, the one thing that women had going for them has been taken away, the one respect in which they had the last laugh over their husbands and lovers. DNA tests are an anti-feminist appliance of science, a change in the balance of power between the sexes that we’ve hardly come to terms with. And that holds true even though many women have the economic potential to provide for their children themselves.

The point is that paternity was ambiguous and it was effectively up to the mother to name her child’s father, or not. (That eminently sensible Jewish custom, whereby Jewishness is passed through the mother, was based on the fact that we only really knew who our mothers are.) Many men have, of course, ended up raising children who were not genetically their own, but really, does it matter? You can feel quite as much tenderness for a child you mistakenly think to be yours as for one who is. Piers Paul Read’s interesting new novel, The Misogynist, touches on just this issue.

I don't think anything has to be said about how callous and ignorant this author sounds, but my question is perhaps more controversial than her inbred hatred of men. Does a man in any situation have a legal obligation to a child if it's not his? For example, you care for a child for 3 years, only to discover he or she is not yours.

My answer is no, the "father" has no obligation. In fact if I were in that situation I'd promptly file for a divorce and cut off all financial ties, including kicking the mother out of the house. I would probably provide a home for the child until the mother found a place of her own, but that's my sentimental side being expressed.

I'd like to see mandatory paternity testing.

 

[Falvlun]

Legal obligation? No. But I would hope that someone who had been raising and loving a child for 3 years wouldn't be able to say "Oh, you don't have my DNA? Ah, I guess I don't want you anymore."

 

[Falvlun]

I'd like to see mandatory paternity testing.

Why? Shouldn't that be up to the two people involved?

 

[Mathematician]

It saves on future legal and medical costs.

 

[Panda]

I don't understand how you could care for a child for 3 years and not be attached to him/her. Legally I don't think you should be responsible but I think you would be acting a bit like a dick in most circumstances.

 

[Revoltingest]

I don't understand how you could care for a child for 3 years and not be attached to him/her. Legally I don't think you should be responsible but I think you would be acting a bit like a dick in most circumstances.

I know of at least one case where the extent of the father's 'caring' was payment in lieu of court ordered child support. Then it turned out the kid wasn't his.
There are probably quite a few fathers who don't want to support a child they don't know solely by giving money to a mother they dislike. If this is anti-feminist, I'm OK with it.

 

[Father Heathen]

How is it "anti-feminist"? That a woman can't hold power over someone through the use of deception? As for "does it matter?" - Yes, yes it does matter when someone is being used, deceived and manipulated. Of course, the child needs the support of a loving figure in their life, and should he do so by his own will out of love, great, but a man shouldn't be held legally obligated to care for another man's child.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Came across this gem of feminist rhetoric:

Who



I don't think anything has to be said about how callous and ignorant this author sounds, but my question is perhaps more controversial than her inbred hatred of men. Does a man in any situation have a legal obligation to a child if it's not his? For example, you care for a child for 3 years, only to discover he or she is not yours.

My answer is no, the "father" has no obligation. In fact if I were in that situation I'd promptly file for a divorce and cut off all financial ties, including kicking the mother out of the house. I would probably provide a home for the child until the mother found a place of her own, but that's my sentimental side being expressed.

How sweet. Sucks to be the kid to a father like that, then.

I'd like to see mandatory paternity testing.

I don't mind paternity testing. But a couple questions:

1) Who pays for mandatory paternity testing?
2) Let's say you find out you're not the father, after kicking the mother out and sending the kid with her, should the real biological father be then forced to take the mother and the kid in since....you know.....it's his? How would this be enforced? Or should he have the same right as you to decide he should kick that woman out on her ear too?

Threads like this are strange. It's like talking about a living breathing child as if he or she was a dog, or worse, like an appliance that is shipped around with the woman who gave birth to them.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Came across this gem of feminist rhetoric:

This "feminist rhetoric", as you call it, comes from a 2010 article in the Spectator.
A conservative British publication.
This is not "feminism", it is about fathers, biological or not, having responsibility for their children that attempts to paint modern women in a bad light.

A Father is the one who loves you and raises you, Not the sperm donor.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

This "feminist rhetoric", as you call it, comes from a 2010 article in the Spectator.
A conservative British publication.
This is not "feminism", it is about fathers, biological or not, having responsibility for their children that attempts to paint modern women in a bad light.

A Father is the one who laves you and raises you, Not the sperm donor.

I think when it comes to paternity cases like the ones Revoltingest brought up, where there was the implicit understanding that the man was the father of a baby, but there was no desire by either party to remain together....I completely support the man not having to be legally obligated to provide child support payments or medical coverage if he finds out it isn't his.

But to just kick that child out of his life, because he's ticked off at the kids mom for the mistake whether it was an honest mistake or that she was swindling him? I think that's just taking his anger out on a kid who doesn't know better, and will see the man he looked up to not loving him anymore. I think that's outrageous.

So, let's agree on no child support as an obligation. But don't push that kid away.

 

[4consideration]

How is it "anti-feminist"? That a woman can't hold power over someone through the use of deception? As for "does it matter?" - Yes, yes it does matter when someone is being used, deceived and manipulated. Of course, the child needs the support of a loving figure in their life, and should he do so by his own will out of love, great, but a man shouldn't be held legally obligated to care for another man's child.

I agree.

From the perspective of love any man can be a loving father, whether related or not.

From the perspective of the law, if deception or misinformation were used to convince someone to take on the role of father for another man's child, he should be able to be released from that role because the legal obligation belongs to another man, and not him.

 

[Mathematician]

A lot of emotional appeals in this thread to make men look like selfish buffoons if they decide to remove themselves from the situation entirely.

Should a woman be ethically disposed if her husband brings home a child from a different woman and she doesn't agree to care for the kid?

What's the difference?

 

[Mathematician]

How sweet. Sucks to be the kid to a father like that, then.



I don't mind paternity testing. But a couple questions:

1) Who pays for mandatory paternity testing?
2) Let's say you find out you're not the father, after kicking the mother out and sending the kid with her, should the real biological father be then forced to take the mother and the kid in since....you know.....it's his? How would this be enforced? Or should he have the same right as you to decide he should kick that woman out on her ear too?

Threads like this are strange. It's like talking about a living breathing child as if he or she was a dog, or worse, like an appliance that is shipped around with the woman who gave birth to them.

Tough luck on her for cheating and not being honest. If she can't find the old father, it's her fault. I have absolutely no sympathy for cheaters and actually would prefer that in marriages it would be considered a misdemeanor offense. Her child's welfare is her responsibility, not the man who was victimized.

 

[Father Heathen]

This "feminist rhetoric", as you call it, comes from a 2010 article in the Spectator.
A conservative British publication.

What do you make of the statement "DNA tests are an anti-feminist appliance of science"? Because how dare a man know the truth, right?

 

[Revoltingest]

How is it "anti-feminist"?

Good question. I infer it from the OP.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

How many men want to know the truth...
That their wife found them inadaquate....

A Dna test does not come with the real fathers name attached, it would still require the mother to put a name to him. (if she knows it)

 

[Badran]

I think when it comes to paternity cases like the ones Revoltingest brought up, where there was the implicit understanding that the man was the father of a baby, but there was no desire by either party to remain together....I completely support the man not having to be legally obligated to provide child support payments or medical coverage if he finds out it isn't his.

But to just kick that child out of his life, because he's ticked off at the kids mom for the mistake whether it was an honest mistake or that she was swindling him? I think that's just taking his anger out on a kid who doesn't know better, and will see the man he looked up to not loving him anymore. I think that's outrageous.

So, let's agree on no child support as an obligation. But don't push that kid away.

Those are my thoughts on this.

The man should have absolutely no legal obligation, but that doesn't touch on whether or not he should want to still take care of the child.

The deception of the mother is no fault of the kid. I understand the anger caused by the devastating deception that has occurred that has caused both the man and the kid to live a lie, but abandoning the kid only makes things worse.

As to the article i think it's absolute nonsense to the point where it's not even worth taking seriously.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Tough luck on her for cheating and not being honest. If she can't find the old father, it's her fault. I have absolutely no sympathy for cheaters and actually would prefer that in marriages it would be considered a misdemeanor offense. Her child's welfare is her responsibility, not the man who was victimized.

First, what is this "tough luck" rhetoric about? Who said it had to be because she cheated? What if she were raped while she was married? And the husband didn't know if the child was biologically his?

Second, how about open marriages? Would you be willing to enforce a misdemeanor offense against couples who accidentally create offspring outside a legal marriage?

And finally I'm talking about the welfare of the child, not whether or not poor little woman is getting a fair shake. Do you have an opinion on how the child is affected in situations like this?

What I see you're advocating is that in cases of where a man is caring for a child that isn't his biologically, that he's victimized and a woman must be punished for it. Please tell me I'm wrong, because if it's what you're saying you have nothing more than an axe to grind that isn't based on any recognizable sentiments for children's welfare.

 

[Mathematician]

The legally-defensible accounts of rape compared to female infidelity are insignificant. I say legally-defensible because I've been involved in a false rape accusation and know that its prevalence is an unspoken fact of life - otherwise we could argue endlessly about "one in three men" being rapists. Fact of the matter is more women cheat on spouses of SO's than are raped. Furthermore if the woman lies about rape to the husband, she still committed a crime. You simply can't justify conducting ethical and legal misconduct because you were the victim of legal and ethical crimes.

"I was abused at a young age; thus me hitting you is justified."
"I was raped; thus my lying to you about possible paternity is justified."

Second, how about open marriages? Would you be willing to enforce a misdemeanor offense against couples who accidentally create offspring outside a legal marriage?

Depends on the circumstances of the open marriage. If the husband did not explicitly agree to taking care of another man's child, then yes.

And finally I'm talking about the welfare of the child, not whether or not poor little woman is getting a fair shake. Do you have an opinion on how the child is affected in situations like this?

It's unfortunate, but the woman is to blame, so why is it relevant? Should you be legally obligated to take care of my children because it would benefit the child?

The child's welfare is secondary to the man's independence if he's not the biological father. Anything else is sexist and slavery. Deceit takes precedent before heat-strings.

 

[LuisDantas]

A Father is the one who loves you and raises you, Not the sperm donor.

This. In spades. With a vengeance. With a cherry on its top.

Laws about paternity tests are much like any other laws: useful because they settle otherwise insoluble litigations. It helps that they are based on factual information.

But anyone who thinks that settling the matter of biological paternity should be decisive is not taking the matter of filiation and family very seriously.