Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.
Alexis de Tocqueville
No, the basis of my position is that the biological father must give up his parental rights before someone else can have access to those rights. In this case, a man signed into legal responsibilities under a lie by the mother that both mislead another party and bypassed the rights of the biological father. The contract should obviously be null and void and its both fraud and a right violation. As for support, that is more of a result of a system that I frankly reject.What do you mean mean by 'I am not even considering support as the basis of my position' - that's what this whole issues is about: who pays child support? the bio fathers after 12 / 14 / 16 years . . . or the father figure who has been there for 12 / 14 / 16 years and those girls grew up knowing as 'dad - our provider'
I don't recall him saying he didn't care for them. Anyway, since they are not his kids they are just people he cares about or not. It's that simple.To me - the damage is done when the father they HAVE known says 'see-ya - don't care about ya - someone else who doesn't know you at all can provide for you - not me - not my concern suddenly' . . . he shouldn't be allowed to stab the girls in the back like that.
I don't think child support, for children you raised for what..16 years(?) is where you allow legal justice for the way his wife treated him. Caring for chilrden either falls on taxpayers, or the parents, and he's the parent, it's his responsibility regardless (and the ex wifes of course).
I don't know enough about the law but maybe this guy has a case to be made in some civil action against his ex-wife.
And we still don't know how much of his parental rights were stripped from him because it was found he is not the father (legally).
“The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman
That is your choice.2. Losing parental rights, but will still be involved in their lives? Are you kidding here? Look, If I found out that the guy I thought loved me, and was my father, all of the sudden was not, and won't support me, do you really think I'd want to see the guy? pfft, I'd tell him to F off.
Last edited by Henrin; 02-08-13 at 11:54 AM.
And like I said some number of posts ago - the bio fathers should assert their 'rights' if that's what they want and then have the courts decide on that separate issue.
See - this is where lack of info is a bitch . . . maybe the bio dads never cared and always knew? To many guys who have one-night stands and affairs who then father children out of that they just don't care and walk away - dissolving rights without going through any sort of legal avenue to do so.
Further - the courts can't force her to tell who they might be if she doesn't want to . . . and so on. She made the decision all those many years ago.
Women are granted the ultimate say from the beginning because we're hte ones who are pregnant and carry / birth the child. If an estranged or uninvolved biological father wants to be involved in said child's life THEY should pursue it IMMEDIATELY.
I only hear crickets.
A screaming comes across the sky.
It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow
My argument is this: If the man had any inkling of a doubt, then he should have voiced that concern and had a paternity test preformed long before now. Who raises children from a young age and has hidden doubt, and then 16 years later says, "Oh but no.. I have cared for, provided for and loved these children this long... but NOW... oh no. I hate their mother and I'm sending the message to the children that I couldn't care less about them because I'm not the one who 'created' them"?
He was given a choice. If he had doubts about the paternity - he had to choice whether or not to persue that avenue. He chose not to.
Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice....shame on me.