Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Wolfehunter
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aramike
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TarJak
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by GoldenRivet
screw him if thats how he feels, i have worn those shoes before my friend.
but imagine I'M the dad.
Imagine for many years of my life i have been raising 2 kids that didnt belong to me.
despite how i felt about the kids... I WOULD BE PISSED, and i would probably rather not pay the child support any more.
that wife can find the man who owes her that money. i would still have an emotional attachment no doubt but i would have zero monetary responsibility.
16 years is a long time to be living a lie... not all men would take the attitude of "ohhhh awwwww well thats okay... because we love each other."
there happen to be a lot of men who would just dig 3 holes in the ground and put that "wife" and his "kids" in the ground.
|
The whole point of the decision is what is based on best for the kids. NOT what is better for the mother or father.
In the absence of anyone else, when there is a "father" who has been footing the bills for the support of the family, blood relativity doesn't come into it. The kids need supporting and the "father" in this case, is it, regardless of the biological parentage of the children. Once the kids reach majority they are on their own but until then the state ain't paying.
Doesn't mean I agree with it. As a tax payer though I'd support the decision, as the "father" I'd be hacked off by it and as child I'd be wondering who my biological father was and why my dad doesn't want anything to do with me any more. |
I disagree. Just because something may be "best for the kids" doesn't mean that someone should be essentially socially and economically imprisoned. That argument is far too open to interpretation.
You'd be forcing someone to continue paying for the mistakes of someone else, even AFTER that mistake is known!
Sure, kids have rights. But not at the expense of other adults. |
Reality is people!
Not what is the best interest of the kid. Not what is the best interest of the parents.
But what is the best interest?
Best interest depends on the judge. Judge decides the fate. Judge determines the best interests according to his or her personal preferences, belief's and experiences.
What is right and wrong doesn't god dam matter.
That's reality. |
This is where laws are supposed to come into play. It's too bad that so many judges tend to sidestep the law in order to make it fit more properly with their personal convictions ... but that's a discussion for another thread.
Here's an analogy I've come up with: Let's say you were found unconscious holding a bloody knife next to a person who was murdered. You have no memory of what happened. You conclude that it likely was you who killed that person, and plead guilty.
While in prison, events trigger memories that suggest that you may not have murdered that person after all. You plead with the prosecutor to take another look at the case, and he agrees. DNA evidence then exonorates you from the murder.
Now, should you have to stay in prison simply because, for the majority of the time, you've accepted your fate?
That's what the reasoning behind the whole idea that, "well, since you acted as their father for so many years, you are therefore the father" seems like. It is utterly preposterous.