HomeChild SupportIf a guy finds out a child is not his own, they should pay for it “child support”?
Posted in Child Support on 2nd August 2013

If a guy finds out a child is not his own, they should pay for it “child support”?
For starters, do not think the emotional attachment to this Q. … Let’s say Jack finds out that his 8-year-old girl was fathered by someone else. He decides to divorce his wife, Jill. As Jill obviously sex with at least one other man besides her husband, she is “guilty” of fraud by not admitting him, the child may not be his. So, after the divorce, @ Riitz should not the courts, to make Jill “child support” payments to Jack for 8 years to get it for the cost of raising the child, which does not compensate for his: But would not it already a ” be implied trust “that a married couple, the children would be their own? Thus, a DNA test at birth is not required Best Answer (s):.

Reply Bill_the_Dog

response of integration 20
I like it. It might help to deter paternity fraud.

reply by Anthony
Its only fair, I’m sure every woman who has done this know who the real father was with her so-called intuition. So yes, they should pay him back money he spent on the child, not his.

reply by Beth
I do not like Jack was not to pay by a court to alimony in the first place, if it has just paid his way for himself and his family that’s his decision whether or not the child was his. Unless he was ordered to ever see support for whatever reason, he was married to pay, he is not guilty in the eyes of the law.

Reply RiitzC No
. It would be the argument that he would have done a DNA test earlier not much to stand sein.Theres for the case when he could not make a valid point and held each input and evidence of what wurde.Menschen spent on child money . It should werden.Edit expected: Sure, but no where does it firmly under marriage law by law, that the persons to be monogamous. It is a part of the agreement, the pairs are kept in the hope würde.Ich’m not saying that’s right for women to make it easy to do that there’s not much you can do to change the past.

Reply crǝǝpy Cupcake ♥
I find stories like this so sad. The only problem would be the woman may not be the cost to support the child if they had to pay off debts and the child is the most important person in the whole situation. But no, a man should never be a child who does not have and if anything I think that the family courts should help to compensate him. You have enough money as it ist.Ich think that men made to pay the child routine DNA testing should be offered. I find it pretty disgusting that women only say that a child is a human being, if the child might not.

be answer by Cutiepie is!
If the child looks just like his mother or the woman intentionally took a guy who noticed just like the dad-to-hut with on the side, how could not the father that the child be? looked like? He should have to pay for his clueless. If I was a man and my wife popped out a baby who looked nothing like me, I would be immediately suspicious.

response from Apple ♫ ♪ ☻ ♥
No, it would not make sense if the child lived with the mother anyway cause they already support the child and bring it up.

response of rowdy McFarlane
paternity fraud should major pay-back to the victim (the man and the child), as well as possible prison time.

Related Post for Maple Bear Pioneers ‘Computational Pondering’ Program for Preschoolers

Disciplining your Preschooler – Attend knowledgeable session !!
Love In direction of Books Begins with Preschool
Should know elements to implement Daycare Profit to your firm
Ipsaa begins a brand new heart in Bangalore at Status Poseidon
Maple Bear Pioneers ‘Computational Pondering’ Program for Preschoolers