Would you pay child support for kids that weren’t yours?

Via: newspaper.li

Via: newspaper.li

This, fresh from Canada

A father has been ordered to pay child support to his ex-wife despite results of DNA testing that found three of the four children he helped raise are not biologically his, a Quebec Superior Court ruled.

The man learned the shocking news after he demanded DNA testing when he and his wife of 16 years separated in April 2010.

“Since I learned that I am a broken man,” the father told QMI Agency.  

His daughters are aged 12, 14, and 16, and his son is nine. DNA testing revealed the son is his only biological child.

To make matters worse, his ex-wife told him his three daughters were all fathered by different men, he said.

The man said he was aware his wife cheated on him several times, but was floored when he discovered the results.

“I was naive … I never thought I could not be the father of my children,” he said.

Canadian Dave Murphy, reading about the case, comments

I was ordered to pay support for 2 kids who are not mine and my duty counselor was not not concerned that she already had a order against the biological father, she was only concerned with figuring out how much I would have to pay.

After 2 years of trying to get help with this I filed papers with the court on my own and when the court arrived my duty counsel refused to enter the court with me, stating the judge would only make me pay more.

I was already paying the maximum allowed. My duty counsel and my ex’s raised their voices at me and demanded me to sign an agreement outside the court at a reduced amount.

Now I am on a fixed income and they still take any monies from tax rebates or the other refunds given out by revenue Canada.

A court clerk in London where I filed said in 20 years he never knew of such a case and the agents at the Family Responsibility that I have had contact with also stated they believed it was wrong.

Still trying to stop it but never once got a call back from any lawyer to help me fight

 

via: Toronto Sun

Tagged:
  • Alice Nikenbocker

    If I loved the kids and had helped raise them, sure why not.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=706456651 Nigel Sherrie Fairweather-Hunt

    i didnt realise that Canada was a socialist nation. guess they must be to have judges who rule like this.

    • Michael

      Oh yeah, the NDP rule in Quebec. Labour but French!

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=706456651 Nigel Sherrie Fairweather-Hunt

        yeah, we are bordering in socialist here too.

    • Tristanb

      Yep, that’s why they got a Canadian judge to make some money out of the Bain case, and say that Bain was innocent – without explaining how Robin did it.

  • http://pukeko.net.nz/blog chrisgale

    Fairly standard behaviour by a North American Court. At least he is not in debtors prison.

    The entire family court system in Canada and the USA is flagrantly biased against fathers and grossly unjust.

    • Travis Poulson

      But he’s not the father, that’s the problem.

      • Alice Nikenbocker

        He’s not the biological father, but he is the man who raised the kids (which I’m sure makes him a father to these children in some sense). Surely he has some concern about their futures, if he was any respectable father he would.

        • Bafacu

          Alice, you obviously have a more than passing acquaintance with a noted literary genius! Let me put this is simple terms – he has to pay to keep his (not his) children while the real father(s) pay nothing. Anything seem strange to you in this scenario? The mother keeps ripping him off (as apparently she has for the past 17 years) and all is well because he helped bring up someone else’s kids – bollocks!

          • Alice Nikenbocker

            The wife is a horrible person, I’m not going to deny that. But the selfishness of the parents shouldn’t come at the cost of raising children properly. Genetic make up of the children is irrelevant really, and the man should at least have a strong relationship with the children he raised and should care enough to support them no matter how much of an ass hole his ex-wife is.

            Sure the biological fathers should help support the children, but I’d like to think that the father who these children spent their lives with wasn’t selfish enough to think a shared genetic make up is the only thing that makes a parent.

            TL;DR: Both the mother and father at least from this article come off as self absorbed ass holes who really don’t care much about the welfare of their children and don’t really deserve this publicity.

          • Tom

            Especially as 3/4 of it has been a lie. Borderline fraud IMO

          • Hazards001

            The father in this article is the father of one kid…and one kid only…the slapper he was married to should get a DNA test of all the other f tards SHE..not the father…screwed…then they should be paying…not him…THEM..you need to get a grip on reality..Why should he pay for his ex’s slut behavior and the results of it for the rest of his life?
            Unless of course you feel that it’s appropriate that he does?

          • Alice Nikenbocker

            BECAUSE HE LOVES THE CHILDREN HE RAISED MAYBE? I hope none of you guys breed with this kind of attitute towards children and women. I’m not going to try justify the ex-wife’s behaviour, but this man should realise these children who have depended on him their whole lives won’t stop needing him just because they’re not his nut fruits.

          • Hazards001

            Read my reply to WO, because in that you can see that clearly i have kids.
            “BECAUSE HE LOVES THE CHILDREN HE RAISED MAYBE?”

            Point one would be that if that was the case we’d have never have heard of the case, the reason it is in the public domain is due to the outrageous decision of the court, a decision that would not have come about if the father hadn’t gone to court in the first place so as not to be required to pay for kids that aren’t his.

            Point two would be it has nothing to do with the kids but the mother. It is the ho bags responsibility to support her children…not his…his responsibility ends with his one kid. Hers is to find the other kids fathers..and it appears there are 3 of them.

            You are typical of the feminazis..you want it all your own way. Full custody no rights for men ….and then hello…you expect non birth fathers to support your slut decisions just because they know the kids?

            Piss off…I’m tired of slappers that think there are no repercussions.

          • Callum

            If he went for custody, he would be denied on the basis he has no legal standing as a parent of the 3 daughters. But he is still expected to pay his ex wife to look after SOCK’s. Screw that.

          • Alice Nikenbocker

            Actually he would have a chance because he has been the children’s legal guardian their entire lives.

          • Callum

            Without a legal adoption (which he won’t have if he thought they were his kids) he has NO legal standing what so ever. so pockets getting plundered for SOCK’s with no legal comeback.

    • Middleagedwhiteguy

      not the three other fathers it would seem…

    • Michael

      It’s not limited to the states or Canada.

      NZ is just as fucking bad. I remember being lectured by IRD child support case works about my moral responsibility as a father to my kids. I was always the one at fault regardless.

  • TomTom

    What he should be doing is getting exclusive custody over all them, seeing as clearly the mother is worthless and not suitable to be a parent. The other thing is that for the three children, they would still see him as their dad and they still have the other half-sibling that IS his.

  • peterwn

    AFAIK in NZ the biological father is the one who pays family support but the onus is on the alleged father to prove otherwise.

    There was a wierd case where a late teens girl left home to study in another town and her mum did not pass on the child support money pertaining to her, but used it for her own lifestyle. The father was unsuccessful in having deductions stopped because of the rigid and formulaistic nature of the regulations (Bill Birch wanted to keep it simple and effective).

  • thor42

    Umm…. we’re doing this as taxpayers *anyway*.

    It’s called the DPB.

  • Middleagedwhiteguy

    I’m sure the father will have a major emotional attachment to the children, but that is compounded by the fact that they are not his. As well, there are three men who are biologically responsible, and have got off scot free. If a man can be a liable parent based on biology only regardless of the emotional attachment, then there has to be a level of liability on behalf of the biological father.

    The financial burden of having one man pay child support for three children whose three fathers should be paying for must be particularly onerous and is patently unfair.

  • http://www.whaleoil.co.nz Whaleoil

    There is a massive difference between being a father and being a sperm donor…people often confuse the two. A father is a father through his actions, it doesn’t matter whether or not they are biologically his kids or not…he loved them until he went prying with the DNA…that just makes him stupid…same as when people go poking around in Facebook messages and emails…mostly they can’t handle what they find, misinterpret it and generally ruin their lives…same deal here…

    • P1LL

      Don’t be a dick Cameron.
      The biological father/s should be held accountable, they fucked the slut and made the children .
      I am sure that the man who has been a father ( not the biological father) to them would be happy to help out but he should not be held accountable for children some player created with his slut wife.

      • fozzie2

        Why do you label the opportunists as fathers – yet the woman a slut ? By your definition are the biological ‘ fathers’ also sluts ?

        • Sponge

          Yes they are. God I despise agreeing with you….

          • fozzie2

            spongy there is lies one of the the conundrums of life. The idea that ere is some perfect left-right split is nuts ! I grew up in a political world and it quickly taught me an important lesson – I could not agree with a person’s ideas – but still enjoy them as friends. Debate is the heart of a democracy – long may it reign !

          • Sponge

            Agreed – on some things I am very right and some slightly left – still you are wrong most of the time Fozzie2. :) Unless you agree with me of course……

          • fozzie2

            ;>)) spongy !!!

        • Hazards001

          Yes!

          • fozzie2
          • Hazards001

            keep reading

        • Callum

          Only if they KNEW she was married.

    • Hazards001

      Bullshit, he took the DNA tests after he discovered his wife was a slapper. My ex takes the money the IRD told her she could claim from me based on my salery.

      Her partner that to this day lives in the house I paid for and have not had a pay out from pays not one cent of his income to the upbringing of my kids. They have seperate accounts (something we did not) and if she has no money to pay for extras it is me she comes to not him, despite the fact that he has the pleasure of my childrens company week to week and attempts to be a father figure to them,,,something I stomp on as soon as they (my kids) make me aware of it. I have no sympathy for these bitches that want someone else to pay for their kids just because they don’t know who the father is!

    • layoutman

      While I agree with you in general terms, I would rephrase as ” Father” = Biological donor AND “Dad = Person who raises, cares, and unconditionally loves the child. Often (not often enough) this is the same person.

      Speaking from experience as a hard working Father of 3 but Dad of 5 and Grand Dad of 1 (non biological) – He should have the right to choose how he spends his money on the children that are not biologically his. I see the answer as simple.

      The Biological father(s) of the 3 children should be made to pay (including back dated) child support – this goes to the mother/mum.

      The ‘Dad’ should have equal custody rights to the children based the original fraud that has provided him an opportunity to experience the joys of being a dad to 4 children – and the ‘Dad’ should also be able to spend his money on his 4 loved ones as he wishes and not at the sole direction of his ex-wife.

  • Michael

    This is a tough one. The kids only know this guy as their father.

    Personally I think the he is trying to shaft his ex, but he is impacting _his_ kids. Just because the wasn’t the sperm donor in these instances (poor bastard), doesn’t mean these aren’t his kids.

    I have a mate that pays child support for a kid that isn’t biologically his, but he considers her as his own. I really admire him for it. She only knows him as her dad.. and why not.. people adopt and foster all the time and it makes no difference.

    I do feel for this guy, he has been served a nasty shit sandwich, but he needs to man up and take a bite. He raised these kids and these kids (an assumption here) only know him as there dad.

    As a weekend dad, I know it can be easy to take cheap jabs at the ex via the kids, but you really really have to make sure you don’t and that is really hard. Kids are the frequent victims in their parents bullshit and we often forget that.

  • brattus

    Being in this type of situation I think I can comment. I married beause she was pregnant, marrage lasted 16 months when he was 10 could afford DNA. He wasnt mine. Sent copies to IRD and Winz Was a few years ago now. Winz or their predecessor paid after a while( Lawyers) but IRD paid out on the DNA cert. My claytons son calls me DAD. But I needed to know and had doubts.Legaly there is no binding things but he flew fron Aus to his grandmothers funeral and keeps in contact. Life is hard these things dont help, but once the anger settles you see clearer and the child is in the middle and you cant take it out on them

  • StupidDisqus

    Common Law is clear: the husband is the legal father of all children born to a married woman. If you want to dispute it at the time, fine: get divorced early.

    But if you’re married to the woman, you’re the legal father of her kids. Open. Shut.

    Conservatives are supposed to understand and respect legal precedent.

  • http://www.facebook.com/bart.couprie Bart Couprie

    Now what’s to bet that many of the people who are commenting that

  • jedmo

    reminds me of the case of Chris Jones and his kidnapped son a few years back…the extreme lengths…extreme obstacles placed in his path…extreme hoops he had to go through…not to mention extreme financial cost; to get simple contact with his son…shows NZ hasn’t gotten it right for fathers yet

105%