Man finds out he's not the father of 3 children. Yup you guess what happens next...
Original story is in french and subscription only. Happened in Montreal, Canada.
- 39 years old man dates woman for over 16 years (not married).
- Has 4 children with that woman.
- Youngest kid is now 9 years old.
- Man eventually thinks his GF might be cheating on him.
- Gets DNA tests for his 4 children.
- Finds out he's not the biological father of 3 of them.
- Breaks up.
- Man is forced to pay for child support.
- Why? Because he signed the birth certificates which makes him the "legal" father of the 3 children.
- He now has to pay over $700/month in child support even though he only makes $900 (net) per month.
- Has to go back to living with his parents.
- Man is severely depressed and will most likely commit suicide within the next week or so.
http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/05/trois-de-ses-enfants-ne-sont-pas-de-lui
EDIT: English link:
http://www.torontosun.com/2013/02/06/dad-must-pay-child-support-for-3-kids-that-arent-his-court-rules
Raging beyond belief at the moment. Cannot believe the system is supporting women in committing fraud.
At the very least the woman should be facing a civil charge. Most preferably some sort of criminal charge, but no she is rewarded for it by getting child support and the man is yet again punished.
Extremely sad to see what the Western world has become; what was the promise and the start of the prevalence of logic and rationale has been totally thrown off course.
- 39 years old man dates woman for over 16 years (not married).
- Has 4 children with that woman.
- Youngest kid is now 9 years old.
- Man eventually thinks his GF might be cheating on him.
- Gets DNA tests for his 4 children.
- Finds out he's not the biological father of 3 of them.
- Breaks up.
- Man is forced to pay for child support.
- Why? Because he signed the birth certificates which makes him the "legal" father of the 3 children.
- He now has to pay over $700/month in child support even though he only makes $900 (net) per month.
- Has to go back to living with his parents.
- Man is severely depressed and will most likely commit suicide within the next week or so.
http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2013/02/05/trois-de-ses-enfants-ne-sont-pas-de-lui
EDIT: English link:
http://www.torontosun.com/2013/02/06/dad-must-pay-child-support-for-3-kids-that-arent-his-court-rules
Raging beyond belief at the moment. Cannot believe the system is supporting women in committing fraud.
At the very least the woman should be facing a civil charge. Most preferably some sort of criminal charge, but no she is rewarded for it by getting child support and the man is yet again punished.
Extremely sad to see what the Western world has become; what was the promise and the start of the prevalence of logic and rationale has been totally thrown off course.
(edited 11 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Ultimate1
Original story is in french and subscription only. Happened in Montreal, Canada.
Raging beyond belief at the moment. Cannot believe the system is supporting women in committing fraud.
At the very least the woman should be facing a civil charge. Most preferably some sort of criminal charge, but no she is rewarded for it by getting child support and the man is yet again punished.
Extremely sad to see what the Western world has become; what was the promise and the start of the prevalence of logic and rationale has been totally thrown off course.
Raging beyond belief at the moment. Cannot believe the system is supporting women in committing fraud.
At the very least the woman should be facing a civil charge. Most preferably some sort of criminal charge, but no she is rewarded for it by getting child support and the man is yet again punished.
Extremely sad to see what the Western world has become; what was the promise and the start of the prevalence of logic and rationale has been totally thrown off course.
You'd think after all those years he might actually love the children who are innocent in the matter and feel like a parent and want to support them. Is it ok that his concern for them instantaneously disappeared when he found out that his sperm was not involved? One of them is his but it seems like his financial and ego centred concerns trump any child centred approach. They sound as bad as each other to me.
Do you also think it should be criminal for a guy to get a woman into bed claiming to be committed to the relationship then run a mile when she gets pregnant and refuse to pay for his offspring? If so we will need quite a few new prisons.
I do have to agree with the poster above, Archers Fan, that the real shame is that he cannot find love for these children even after dedicating a large proportion of his life to bringing them up. However, he should not have to pay to bring up somebody else's children when it is his wife who has deceived him, especially when he is being reduced to have to live with his parents. The wife ought to be the one paying here, or the one with whom she had the affair. Again though, I must say that it is a shame that the man cannot treat the children as his own even after bringing them up.
Original post by The_Duck
Cheating isn't a crime. And he was happy to admit that they were his children before the tests.
Of course hes going to think the children were his before the tests- he was with her for 16 years and only recently thought she was cheating, does that mean all men should have their children tested before signing a birth certificate? And cheating is morally wrong it might not be a crime, but allowing someone to sign a birth certificate when theres a chance their not the father is a crime
You know I don't think it's out of any sexist intent, it's just a case of the law being too slow to change with the times. After all those laws were made by men. Hopefully it will change one day.
Original post by Ultimate1
At the very least the woman should be facing a civil charge. Most preferably some sort of criminal charge, but no she is rewarded for it by getting child support and the man is yet again punished.
At the very least the woman should be facing a civil charge. Most preferably some sort of criminal charge, but no she is rewarded for it by getting child support and the man is yet again punished.
Whether overall the case is right or wrong, I don't think the above is about "rewarding" the woman. It's about taking care of children.
Original post by Archers fan
You'd think after all those years he might actually love the children who are innocent in the matter and feel like a parent and want to support them. Is it ok that his concern for them instantaneously disappeared when he found out that his sperm was not involved? One of them is his but it seems like his financial and ego centred concerns trump any child centred approach. They sound as bad as each other to me.
Do you also think it should be criminal for a guy to get a woman into bed claiming to be committed to the relationship then run a mile when she gets pregnant and refuse to pay for his offspring? If so we will need quite a few new prisons.
Do you also think it should be criminal for a guy to get a woman into bed claiming to be committed to the relationship then run a mile when she gets pregnant and refuse to pay for his offspring? If so we will need quite a few new prisons.
Good points.
Original post by The_Duck
Cheating isn't a crime. And he was happy to admit that they were his children before the tests.
I'm sure there are several imams ready to debate you on that point.
On topic: I hope she contracts ovarian cancer, gets stabbed in the eye by a crack addict, and becomes locked in a kiln, whereupon she is shortly afterwards cooked alive, with a nice, crispy, shiny, glaze.
It wrong. They aren't his children and he should have no more legal commitment to pay for them than anyone else.
As for the people saying he should just love them anyway, in much the same way women who are raped often can't bear to keep their kids, just saying love them is pretty easy when they aren't a constant reminder of a something traumatic and hurtful. Its hard to move on from a painful event when you have a reminder staring you in the face everyday.
The problem with this is the guy who is the actual father is getting away with it. He's not caring or paying for his kids, so in lieu of that they have just turned and bent the nearest guy over a barrel. What should be happening is that guy is getting taken to court and sued for back payments, and the guy being released from commitments he didn't make.
As for the people saying he should just love them anyway, in much the same way women who are raped often can't bear to keep their kids, just saying love them is pretty easy when they aren't a constant reminder of a something traumatic and hurtful. Its hard to move on from a painful event when you have a reminder staring you in the face everyday.
The problem with this is the guy who is the actual father is getting away with it. He's not caring or paying for his kids, so in lieu of that they have just turned and bent the nearest guy over a barrel. What should be happening is that guy is getting taken to court and sued for back payments, and the guy being released from commitments he didn't make.
What she did was ****ty, but he's also an ******** if he's been a father to this children and they've grown attached to him and he doesn't want to pay for them now he knows they've not got his DNA.
Family isn't just your 'blood'.
I don't think the system is "supporting women in committing fraud" and that " she is rewarded for it by getting child support" because the focus here is on the needs of the children: they're gonna need money for upkeep and it needs to come from somewhere, and they clearly think the 'best' (or 'easiest' in that they can make someone else pay rather than the government) is for him to pay. Unless she's a crappy mother as well as a crappy girlfriend, the money will be spent on the children.
To be fair, although they may not be related to him, he did act like a father and he thought those were his children. It's not their fault their mother did some terrible ****, they don't deserve to be 'punished' (i.e by him disowning them or whatever he's trying to do). He's a sh*t dad if he doesn't want to help his kids (even if his sperm wasn't involved in making them - how many ****ing years have they looked up to him as a dad and him seen them as his children?).
It would be a waste of time and money to charge her. It seems a bit extreme to charge her simply for not putting the biological father's name on the certificate: perhaps she herself was unsure of who the parent was? What should happen is that the man should be able to opt out of paying child support as he falsely believed they were his children. If he was a decent father, I imagine he'd still want to support them.
Tbh I think it's unfair how men are expected to pay child support for children they don't want (this is a sort of vaguely linked point), I think there should be an opt out system in pregnancy. If the woman wants to keep a baby, but the man doesn't want to be a father (and obviously he can't force her to abort that would be just wrong, just as it would be just wrong to force her to remain pregnant when its her body and health being affected), he should be able to legally give up his rights to the child which would also mean he wouldn't have to pay child support (and the woman should be informed of his decision). This should be done as soon as he finds out she's pregnant.
Probably would cause all sorts of problems but it'd be nice, and a lot fairer. Feel sorry for all the guys who don't want to be a dad but are forced into paying child support because the legal system doesn't allow them to opt out. Personally, I think it's so the government doesn't have to fork out more benefits for children with low-earning mothers - they can get someone else to pay directly instead.
Family isn't just your 'blood'.
I don't think the system is "supporting women in committing fraud" and that " she is rewarded for it by getting child support" because the focus here is on the needs of the children: they're gonna need money for upkeep and it needs to come from somewhere, and they clearly think the 'best' (or 'easiest' in that they can make someone else pay rather than the government) is for him to pay. Unless she's a crappy mother as well as a crappy girlfriend, the money will be spent on the children.
To be fair, although they may not be related to him, he did act like a father and he thought those were his children. It's not their fault their mother did some terrible ****, they don't deserve to be 'punished' (i.e by him disowning them or whatever he's trying to do). He's a sh*t dad if he doesn't want to help his kids (even if his sperm wasn't involved in making them - how many ****ing years have they looked up to him as a dad and him seen them as his children?).
It would be a waste of time and money to charge her. It seems a bit extreme to charge her simply for not putting the biological father's name on the certificate: perhaps she herself was unsure of who the parent was? What should happen is that the man should be able to opt out of paying child support as he falsely believed they were his children. If he was a decent father, I imagine he'd still want to support them.
Tbh I think it's unfair how men are expected to pay child support for children they don't want (this is a sort of vaguely linked point), I think there should be an opt out system in pregnancy. If the woman wants to keep a baby, but the man doesn't want to be a father (and obviously he can't force her to abort that would be just wrong, just as it would be just wrong to force her to remain pregnant when its her body and health being affected), he should be able to legally give up his rights to the child which would also mean he wouldn't have to pay child support (and the woman should be informed of his decision). This should be done as soon as he finds out she's pregnant.
Probably would cause all sorts of problems but it'd be nice, and a lot fairer. Feel sorry for all the guys who don't want to be a dad but are forced into paying child support because the legal system doesn't allow them to opt out. Personally, I think it's so the government doesn't have to fork out more benefits for children with low-earning mothers - they can get someone else to pay directly instead.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by Arturo Bandini
Whether overall the case is right or wrong, I don't think the above is about "rewarding" the woman. It's about taking care of children.
And why should he be the one taking care of kids that are not his?
You don't think he should even be getting a refund from the mother for the years of deceit?
Original post by vaguity
they're gonna need money for upkeep and it needs to come from somewhere
Original post by vaguity
What she did was ****ty, but he's also an ******** if he's been a father to this children and they've grown attached to him and he doesn't want to pay for them now he knows they've not got his DNA.
Family isn't just your 'blood'.
I don't think the system is "supporting women in committing fraud" and that " she is rewarded for it by getting child support" because the focus here is on the needs of the children: they're gonna need money for upkeep and it needs to come from somewhere, and they clearly think the 'best' (or 'easiest' in that they can make someone else pay rather than the government) is for him to pay. Unless she's a crappy mother as well as a crappy girlfriend, the money will be spent on the children.
To be fair, although they may not be related to him, he did act like a father and he thought those were his children. It's not their fault their mother did some terrible ****, they don't deserve to be 'punished' (i.e by him disowning them or whatever he's trying to do). He's a sh*t dad if he doesn't want to help his kids (even if his sperm wasn't involved in making them - how many ****ing years have they looked up to him as a dad and him seen them as his children? And he wants to throw that away just because they aren't his blood???).
It would be a waste of time and money to charge her. It seems a bit extreme to charge her simply for not putting the biological father's name on the certificate: perhaps she herself was unsure of who the parent was? What should happen is that the man should be able to opt out of paying child support as he falsely believed they were his children. If he was a decent father, I imagine he'd still want to support them.
Tbh I think it's unfair how men are expected to pay child support for children they don't want (this is a sort of vaguely linked point), I think there should be an opt out system in pregnancy. If the woman wants to keep a baby, but the man doesn't want to be a father (and obviously he can't force her to abort that would be just wrong, just as it would be just wrong to force her to remain pregnant when its her body and health being affected), he should be able to legally give up his rights to the child which would also mean he wouldn't have to pay child support (and the woman should be informed of his decision). This should be done as soon as he finds out she's pregnant.
Probably would cause all sorts of problems but it'd be nice, and a lot fairer. Feel sorry for all the guys who don't want to be a dad but are forced into paying child support because the legal system doesn't allow them to opt out. Personally, I think it's so the government doesn't have to fork out more benefits for children with low-earning mothers - they can get someone else to pay directly instead.
Family isn't just your 'blood'.
I don't think the system is "supporting women in committing fraud" and that " she is rewarded for it by getting child support" because the focus here is on the needs of the children: they're gonna need money for upkeep and it needs to come from somewhere, and they clearly think the 'best' (or 'easiest' in that they can make someone else pay rather than the government) is for him to pay. Unless she's a crappy mother as well as a crappy girlfriend, the money will be spent on the children.
To be fair, although they may not be related to him, he did act like a father and he thought those were his children. It's not their fault their mother did some terrible ****, they don't deserve to be 'punished' (i.e by him disowning them or whatever he's trying to do). He's a sh*t dad if he doesn't want to help his kids (even if his sperm wasn't involved in making them - how many ****ing years have they looked up to him as a dad and him seen them as his children? And he wants to throw that away just because they aren't his blood???).
It would be a waste of time and money to charge her. It seems a bit extreme to charge her simply for not putting the biological father's name on the certificate: perhaps she herself was unsure of who the parent was? What should happen is that the man should be able to opt out of paying child support as he falsely believed they were his children. If he was a decent father, I imagine he'd still want to support them.
Tbh I think it's unfair how men are expected to pay child support for children they don't want (this is a sort of vaguely linked point), I think there should be an opt out system in pregnancy. If the woman wants to keep a baby, but the man doesn't want to be a father (and obviously he can't force her to abort that would be just wrong, just as it would be just wrong to force her to remain pregnant when its her body and health being affected), he should be able to legally give up his rights to the child which would also mean he wouldn't have to pay child support (and the woman should be informed of his decision). This should be done as soon as he finds out she's pregnant.
Probably would cause all sorts of problems but it'd be nice, and a lot fairer. Feel sorry for all the guys who don't want to be a dad but are forced into paying child support because the legal system doesn't allow them to opt out. Personally, I think it's so the government doesn't have to fork out more benefits for children with low-earning mothers - they can get someone else to pay directly instead.
So because the money needs to come from somewhere, it should come from someone that has been traumatically conned?
He should continue being punished by the offence of another person?
Why can't the kids be raised by those that produced them?
He should continue acting like a father to kids that will remind him of his wasted years? The way you will be happy raising the kids your husband has with mistresses behind your back.
What a completely useless logical thinking.
Original post by doggyfizzel
Here's a novel idea, how about their actual father? She's clearly didn't just meet him once since there are 3 kids. I know its a massive ask for her to actually remember his name, find him and all these other inconveniences, but I can't help feeling parents paying for their kids may be fairer than people who aren't their parents being forced via legal means to pay for someone else's kids.
An even better option would be to let the woman get the support she needs. Stop all benefits she can receive and give her the bare minimum. Then tell her to get funds herself for the mess she created herself. It's amazing how courts don't let women face the consequences for their actions.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 4 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 4 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?