[cherry]

"If they didn't father the child, they are not the father and should be under no obligation to pay."

so automatic custody goes to the mom if dad is not really dad?

so, after 10 yrs of boy scout meetings, soccer, little league, go karts and throwing the football around in the backyard there is no relationship because the dna was not right?

certainly if you claim to be the father and you choose not to support the kids than you can't demand visitation or any rights for that matter....that's where this is heading...

it seems the "mens" movement is of two minds....one that laments fathers not being able to stay home with the baby while mommmy works and for joint or even full custody of the children, and the other just wanting fatherhood to be strictly a scientific fact.....

My father is half of my dna but he meant more to me than simple biology.....

I feel very sorry for those who look at their God given ability to father children as a burden to be contested rather than rejoiced over...

[stompk]

“I feel very sorry for those who look at their God given ability to father children as a burden to be contested rather than rejoiced over...”

and why exactly would these rejoicing fathers be contecting paternity via DNA testing ?

[cherry]

"certainly if you claim to be the father "

should read...."if you claim NOT to be the father"

[MeanWestTexan]

“I feel very sorry for those who look at their God given ability to father children as a burden to be contested rather than rejoiced over.”

Of course, I certainly see a distinction between a child that was raised by the non-biological father for some time.

In those situations, the mother should be automatically stripped of custody and the involuntarily-adoptive father have the righ to raise the child.

(The mother should, of course, pay child support. It’s only fair.)

[George W. Bush]

so, after 10 yrs of boy scout meetings, soccer, little league, go karts and throwing the football around in the backyard there is no relationship because the dna was not right?

Yep.

You, like HitmanLV, want to legislate your feelings onto others through the courts. You want to victimize men for the crimes and deceit of others.

It's about your feelings. Not justice, not truth. Because on those grounds, you and HitmanLV lose. And you think that misusing the courts is a sign of how moral and compassionate you are.

Hitman is FR's notorious Divorce Troll on threads like these. Have you joined up as a new Divorce Trollette?

[WhyisaTexasgirlinPA]

But that is it exactly Cherry - if the man is not the biological father and this woman decides to divorce him, he won't even be considered for custody - no matter how many nights he sat up with a sick child, or how many boy scout meetings he attended. The man loses out if he isn't the biological father and the woman ever decides to use that against him.

In some cases, there are probably men out there who would gladly stay in the life of that child, even knowing he wasn't his own biological child, but the mother has all the rights, he has none in that case.

[flashbunny]

“I feel very sorry for those who look at their God given ability to father children as a burden to be contested rather than rejoiced over...”

Yes, they should rejoice in paying to raise another man’s child for 18 years.