• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules

ksu_aviator said:
It is called paternity fraud and he should be eligible to get back all of the money he spent raising the children he believed to be his own. This court was 180 degrees from reality.
Click to expand...

No. It may be called paternity fraud, but it's not recognized in a court of law as a way for a supposed dad to recover support he's paid. He will never get back the money he spent raising the children he believed his own. Not in one million years.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
I'm sorry, but I don't believe you for a second. Unless your relationship with your father is terrible or you're some kind of sentient lizardpeople, being rejected by your father like that would be a crushing blow.
Click to expand...

Well my relationship with my father is terrible, but that has nothing to do with my statement. I just wouldn't assume it meant anything more than what he is telling me. Perhaps I'm wrong and I would, but I doubt it.

For medical purposes, sure. They already know who their father is.
Click to expand...

No, because they should know who their biological father is. They should know who that person in front of them actually is to them and who they are not. If they are not the biological father the kid should know it and not be lead to believe otherwise.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules | Canada | News | Toronto Sun

I have absolutely no sympathy for this man. Married for sixteen years, raising four children for over a decade-- and he demands a paternity test when he gets a divorce? I think about the message that sends his children and all I can think is "**** this guy". And I reject the notion that, again, after a decade of raising three children that he is anything but their real father.
Click to expand...

I'm going to be paying child support on kids that aren't biologically mine. Because I am their dad, end of story.

He raised them, he is actually their dad, he should pay child support.
 
clownboy said:
I'm sorry Viktyr, but in every other sense, even legally for everything else, they are NOT his children. He's no longer married to their mother, they are not in his custody and he is not their biological/legal father. The name means nothing and the soul? Since when is the soul recognised by Canadian law?

Had they not been married but he had lived with the gal all these years and then decided to split would he have to pay child support then? Legally.

The ruling was wrong and lazy.
Click to expand...

Bull****...ask them that - those three girls.

I love my father more than anything and if I found out he wasn't my biological father I wouldn't really give a **** - it would alter my relationshp - but it would NOT remove the fact that he IS my father.

My boys know that their dad isn't their biological father and they don't give a rats ass - he's their father and was before he adopted them.

Those children carry his mannerisms, probably say the same jokes he does, and have nothing but a lifetime of memories of him being their father - DIVORCE DOESN'T END THAT and neither does the fact that they were biologically fathered during an affair.
 
clownboy said:
I'm sorry Viktyr, but in every other sense, even legally for everything else, they are NOT his children. He's no longer married to their mother, they are not in his custody and he is not their biological/legal father. The name means nothing and the soul? Since when is the soul recognised by Canadian law?
Click to expand...

He still has his full parental rights, including visitation and the right to petition the courts for custody.

clownboy said:
Had they not been married but he had lived with the gal all these years and then decided to split would he have to pay child support then? Legally.
Click to expand...

Probably, yes. His name would still have been on the birth certificate for all of those years.
 
ksu_aviator said:
It is called paternity fraud and he should be eligible to get back all of the money he spent raising the children he believed to be his own. This court was 180 degrees from reality.
Click to expand...

So your definition of a "father" is sperm?
 
There is so little information in the article that it's difficult to interpret what is actually happening.

Usually men object to child support in the United States when the support payments are set so high that it seems the court is punishing him for being a father or the court is helping the ex-wife extract revenge on the men she hates so much. It is doubly painful for a man when he arrives in court thinking that he might be equally considered for custody and finds that he doesn't even receive a reasonable visitation award, resulting in the next eighteen years of his life being spent living in a studio apartment in order to support a cheating ex-wife that treated him like a piece of crap while he tried his best to hold the marriage together for the sake of the children. Further pain awaits while she turns the kids against him and denies his court ordered visitation. The American courts will not enforce a father's ordered visitation rights, nor punish the ex-wife for refusing to allow him to see his own children, consequently, the children become her weapon. The father does get punished severely if he doesn't write that support check, however.

Most American men walk, decent husbands and fathers, walk out of divorce court devastated by how they were treated by the court. That glass ceiling that women are always complaining about is nothing like the brick wall a man encounters when he tries to get custody of his own children.

The point is that more facts are needed in this case prior to damning the poor bstrd who put up with a cheating whore for all those years.
 
Last edited:
Henrin said:
Why do people assume that because he didn't want to pay child support for kids that are not his own that he doesn't love the kids? How is the one automatically the other? It seems to me all he is doing is saying those kids are not my kids and I do not want to financially support them. Perhaps its not the nicest thing to convey, but it doesn't mean he doesn't love them.
Click to expand...

To be fair, it doesn't necessarily mean he doesn't want to financially support them either - it just means he doesn't want a court to mandate it - and if it's mandated by the court, the mother receives the child support payments and has control over how that's spent. If there's no court order, the deceived "father" might give his former children everything they need, directly, rather than through the mother.

Even though it's not spousal support, there is no question that a portion of child support inevitably provides benefit to the former spouse and not the children.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
My boys know that their dad isn't their biological father and they don't give a rats ass - he's their father and was before he adopted them.
Click to expand...

My kids know that I am not their biological dad. They remember their biological dad, they know his name is Yevgeni Larchenko. Doesn't matter. I'm their dad.

They know that my now-ex-wife is not their biological mom. They remember her a little bit (not as much), and they know that her name is Mariya Simkova. She's their mom.

WHO YOUR PARENTS ARE IS NOT DETERMINED BY WHO SHOT THEIR LOAD INTO WHOM!
 
rocket88 said:
I'm going to be paying child support on kids that aren't biologically mine. Because I am their dad, end of story.

He raised them, he is actually their dad, he should pay child support.
Click to expand...

And that is good on you, let me say, so would I. BUT that's not the standard, nor should it be. Otherwise there would be a whole lot of ex-boyfriends of single mothers paying child support for children that aren't theirs.

But that he contested child support and doesn't have custody now tells us he's probably already cut emotional bait. This is purely about financial support, the emotional support is already gone.
 
People place entirely too much emphasis on "the children." Children are important, yes, and children "deserve" support, yes.... but only by virtue of them having less rights than an adult. But who should care for those children? The person for whom they represent a genetic investment.

I don't have a responsibility to ensure your kids are clothed, or fed, or entertained - YOU do. And if you want to put your kids in JCrew and Hollister, that is your business.... not mine. If you want to feed your kids steak every day, that is your business... not mine. If you want to send your kids to an Ivy League school, that is your business... not mine. In this case, those are not his kids. He has no responsibility to them and their standard of living, regardless of how long he was fulfilling that role out of ignorance. Their mother will either have to double HER efforts to ensure the success of her genetic investment, or maybe she should sue their genetic fathers for child support.
 
rocket88 said:
My kids know that I am not their biological dad. They remember their biological dad, they know his name is Yevgeni Larchenko. Doesn't matter. I'm their dad.

They know that my now-ex-wife is not their biological mom. They remember her a little bit (not as much), and they know that her name is Mariya Simkova. She's their mom.

WHO YOUR PARENTS ARE IS NOT DETERMINED BY WHO SHOT THEIR LOAD INTO WHOM!
Click to expand...
Actually that's exactly how it is determined. Then all the grey zone comes in afterwards. If it would have turned out my dad wasnt my blood father I would have made my mom cancel child support right away. Because its just not right to punch a guy in the nuts once let alone twice. A man has been carrying his lineage around since the beginning of man and you want them to throw that out the window because a woman cheated and a court sided with her?

People may attack a "daddy detractor" all they want but that doesnt mean he hates the kids he was ONCE (hypothetically) attached too. It just means he wants/need to be able to spread HIS seed and breed as nature intended. Kudos to anyone who can raise a child not their own. But how dare you shame anyone not willing to step up to your heightened morals. Not everyone is a super hero. If she wanted exclusive rights to his money she should have kept her vagina exclusive to his penis.
 
rocket88 said:
My kids know that I am not their biological dad. They remember their biological dad, they know his name is Yevgeni Larchenko. Doesn't matter. I'm their dad.

They know that my now-ex-wife is not their biological mom. They remember her a little bit (not as much), and they know that her name is Mariya Simkova. She's their mom.

WHO YOUR PARENTS ARE IS NOT DETERMINED BY WHO SHOT THEIR LOAD INTO WHOM!
Click to expand...

And it sounds like there has been some paperwork filed that has made that legally so, and not applicable in this case. Now suppose you had done no paperwork and you became a single "father". The biological father would have every legal right to sue for custody and could very well win. You may morally be the father, but not legally.
 
this is just an awful situation for everyone involved, especially the poor kiddos.

i have to note that there is now DNA evidence, which means that the biological fathers can be probably compelled to take a paternity test. so, after pinning down the real fathers, can the mother then sue to collect back and future child support from them, as well? my guess is yes. so, in this scenario, she could be collecting child support from three biological fathers and one non-biological father, and any of the biological fathers could sue for custody. this whole situation just sucks. cheaters really cause massive problems. if you want to **** around, don't get married.
 
rocket88 said:
So your definition of a "father" is sperm?
Click to expand...

When it comes to paternity. He was tricked into raising the kids and deserves to get money back. With interest.
 
Helix said:
this is just an awful situation for everyone involved, especially the poor kiddos.

i have to note that there is now DNA evidence, which means that the biological fathers can be probably compelled to take a paternity test. so, after pinning down the real fathers, can the mother then sue to collect back and future child support from them, as well? my guess is yes. so, in this scenario, she could be collecting child support from three biological fathers and one non-biological father, and any of the biological fathers could sue for custody. this whole situation just sucks. cheaters really cause massive problems. if you want to **** around, don't get married.
Click to expand...

If the children were receiving support throughout the marriage, I don't think any support can be collected in arrears.

Perhaps the guy in the article could sue for recompense, but I also doubt that. It's pretty difficult to prove what kind of support he gave to each child. Besides, courts don't want to actually hang a price on an individual child; they'd rather continue to use child support as a punitive measure instead of addressing the mountains of case law that make it so.
 
Helix said:
this is just an awful situation for everyone involved, especially the poor kiddos.

i have to note that there is now DNA evidence, which means that the biological fathers can be probably compelled to take a paternity test. so, after pinning down the real fathers, can the mother then sue to collect back and future child support from them, as well? my guess is yes. so, in this scenario, she could be collecting child support from three biological fathers and one non-biological father, and any of the biological fathers could sue for custody. this whole situation just sucks. cheaters really cause massive problems. if you want to **** around, don't get married.
Click to expand...

Problem is that the mother had multiple affairs, the three children in question have three different fathers, and the mother apparently didn't know they weren't her husbands kids until the divorce and paternity testing.

I see a two or three part special on Maury during sweeps week.
 
This story raises a lot of questions.
For one, what really makes a father? Is it biology, or is it raising children? If it's the latter, why did the slut get his children after the divorce? If it's the former, why does he have to pay child support?
 
Dittohead not! said:
This story raises a lot of questions.
For one, what really makes a father? Is it biology, or is it raising children? If it's the latter, why did the slut get his children after the divorce? If it's the former, why does he have to pay child support?
Click to expand...

Better watch out - Sandra Fluke liberals will be after you because we're all supposed to know that just because a woman can't keep her legs closed doesn't mean she's a slut.
 
clownboy said:
And it sounds like there has been some paperwork filed that has made that legally so, and not applicable in this case. Now suppose you had done no paperwork and you became a single "father". The biological father would have every legal right to sue for custody and could very well win. You may morally be the father, but not legally.
Click to expand...


Considering that he didn't know they weren't his until they were 12,14, and 16 according to the article, he is probably listed on the Birth Certificate as their father. In which case, that is legal paperwork that makes him the father.

It's interesting that some of you who are normally in the "Adoption not Abortion" side are so dismissive of any definition of fatherhood that doesn't begin with sperm. As an adoptive father, I take extreme umbrage with this attitude.
 
ksu_aviator said:
When it comes to paternity. He was tricked into raising the kids and deserves to get money back. With interest.
Click to expand...

If he thought his wife was having affairs, he should have done the paternity tests right away. He wasn't tricked, he was a full and willing participant until 16 years later.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Better watch out - Sandra Fluke liberals will be after you because we're all supposed to know that just because a woman can't keep her legs closed doesn't mean she's a slut.
Click to expand...

And Rush Limbaugh conservatives will be after you for not believing in adoption.
 
rocket88 said:
Considering that he didn't know they weren't his until they were 12,14, and 16 according to the article, he is probably listed on the Birth Certificate as their father. In which case, that is legal paperwork that makes him the father.

It's interesting that some of you who are normally in the "Adoption not Abortion" side are so dismissive of any definition of fatherhood that doesn't begin with sperm. As an adoptive father, I take extreme umbrage with this attitude.
Click to expand...

These are two separate issues, entirely - but I appreciate your take on it. Since this man knew about his wife's multiple affairs and still stayed with her and fathered a child with her 9 years ago, perhaps he would have "adopted" the other three older children at the time had he known, or even if the mother had known.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom