Replies

After a man has a parent relationship with a child for a number of years, he finds out he's not the biological father. Does that make him any less of a father? The child who is not to blame is being punished when the father backs away from his responsibilities of being a parent. Many people adopt children and love and support adopted children. The adopted parent(s) are as much of parent(s) as the biological, even more so. I realize the men are feeling a sense of betrayal, but don't punish the child. These bills to reduce their child support will punish the child(ren) needlessly while devastating the child(ren) emotionally. What do the men think the children are feeling when the children find out that the man they considered their father is not their father nor does he want any further contact with them? I was a single parent but I knew my ex was my child's father. His financial support, even though I worked, made the difference between poverty and above poverty living.

So, according to your logic, if I'm in a bank when it's robbed, and the authorities can't find the robber, I should be forced to go to jail for the crime?

The end never justifies the means, no matter how appealing the end may be.

Okay, I'll put you down on the side in favor of supporting Fraud "for the children".

Nice.

The child who is not to blame is being punished when the father backs away from his responsibilities of being a parent

So, a relationship based upon a deceitful lie is one that should be encouraged? Why should a man, betrayed by a woman, take the time and money out of his life to attempt to be a father to a child that is not his? He committed no crime. If I am the father, you may force me to pay child support.... but NO ONE may FORCE another to be a father. And again, the alleged father is the victim of fraud, and you are making him out to be the villian. The lying, deceitful mother is the felon.

Many people adopt children and love and support adopted children. The adopted parent(s) are as much of parent(s) as the biological, even more so.

I agree with your sentiments that non-biological parents can be a loving, lasting family relationship. However, as any adopting parent can tell you, they KNEW the child was not their biological child. It's merely a case of informed consent.

I was a single parent but I knew my ex was my child's father

Good for you. But, can't you begin to imagine how horrible a man would feel, upon finding out that the kid he was paying for, wasn't really his?

Perhaps you can't. Maybe it's impossible for women (who can't be cuckolded) to viscerally understand how HORRIBLE this is to a man.

Well... let me tell you. Men of my acquaintance are 100% unanimous that these paternity-fraud mothers should be dealt with very severely. Any time the subject is brought up, there is no dissension whatever, and the emotions are extremely violent... even among the gentlest, pleasantest nice guys. The "best interest of the child" argument is dismissed without discussion, as nothing more than a transparent excuse for fraud. If the mother cared about the best interest of the child, she'd be faithful and honest.

"I realize the men are feeling a sense of betrayal, but don't punish the child. These bills to reduce their child support will punish the child(ren) needlessly while devastating the child(ren) emotionally. What do the men think the children are feeling when the children find out that the man they considered their father is not their father nor does he want any further contact with them?"

What a load of manure. If anyone has been harming these children, it's their lying, cheating mothers. They perpetrated fraud and now, not unlike Sadam and other Middle Eastern terrorists, they want to hide behind the children when their fraud is discovered and verified. Absolute moral cowardice on their part.

If a male is fraudulently duped into believing a child who is not his is his responsiblity, he should not be punished when the truth is discovered. Yes, I said punished. The mother should be prosecuted and punished just as if she had used deception to defraud the public for the same amount of money. The duped "father" should be able to seek restitution. The mother should be legally compelled to reveal who the true biological father is and the state should verify this claim with DNA testing, after which they should assign the appropriate amount of parental financial responsibility.

As for the emotional attachment and bond between the duped father and, of course, innocent child/children, the decision of whether/how to continue the parental relationship should be left up to the duped father. He should be given an appropriate amount of time to decide how he wants to proceed and should be given parental rights if he wants them. Do you honestly think that if a real bond has developed between "father" and child that the father just walks away with no emotional damage? Or do you really just equate fatherly responsibilities with giving the mother money? Why is it OK in your book to forget about justice and decency in how these men have been treated because "a child might be harmed"? Who created that situation in these cases? Why don't you insist that the mother be held accountable for her actions? Why should the government have any interest other than finding the biological father and holding him financially responsible? Or can a woman perpetrate any foul deceipt she wants to in your world and then hide behind her children?