[wideawake]

Thanks for posting this. Olivia's take and the way the law is described differ.

The way the law is described, they are not limited to one child as Olivia asserts.

Since two of the three children are blood relatives of both Olivia and Fondray, two children would be allowed.

Since the oldest child is not related by blood, marriage or adoption to all the other occupants (including Fondray) but only to his mother and siblings, he's disqualified.

So, apparently Fondray would rather go through a court battle than suffer the indignity of (a) making an honest woman of Olivia or (b) acknowledging himself as a father, if only an adoptive one, to the oldest boy that he is purportedly raising.

Must be nice for the 15 year old that his mother's gigolo refuses to acknowledge any legal responsibility for him.

[Quick1]

So, apparently Fondray would rather go through a court battle than suffer the indignity of (a) making an honest woman of Olivia or (b) acknowledging himself as a father, if only an adoptive one, to the oldest boy that he is purportedly raising.

If I am the King of Non Sequitors, you are the King of Leaps in Logic.

[madprof98]

Must be nice for the 15 year old that his mother's gigolo refuses to acknowledge any legal responsibility for him.

Doesn't matter what happens to kids. All that matters is that the "adults"--like our wonderful crew of FReeper libertarians--get to do whatever they want when it comes to sexual relationships.

[null and void]

Must be nice for the 15 year old that his mother's gigolo refuses to acknowledge any legal responsibility for him.

You assume much. Perhaps the 15 yo's biological father refuses to give him up for addoption?