Divorce Question: Should the best wallet (most reliable provider) be considered in the "best interest of the child"?

Unfortunately in some states, a child born in a marital union, is considered to be the child of both parties. I think that it's crap that a man should have to pay for a child that isn't biologically his. As far as the woman is concerned, I think she should get off her lazy butt and get a job.

In the days before DNA matches the only test was blood matching which could not confirm only prove dissimilar.

So the law made it the husband who pays because of course, women were chaste outside of marriage.

Now given the ability to prove beyond reason that a child belongs to another she should be thrown out on her butt without a penny. The law is rarely about what's right though and more about making sure the child is paid for by someone other than the public.

Sounds like a case in New York I read about. The court defaulted to "in the best interest of the child" and stuck the non-biology ex-husband with child support. Personally, I believe if a woman is going to spread her legs for a man she needs to take responsibility for any results including children.

If you are stuck paying you can make it a real pain and push for separate bank account for only the child suport and that you want the ability to audit from time to time to make sure the "best interest of the child is being met".

Or flip the situation and raise the child yourself and make her pay you child support.

Unfortunate for the child, however, this was the mother's deceit and this man should not be responsible for a child that isn't his. Usually the courts support only holding the bio father responsible, however after enough time has passed some courts have ruled otherwise.

Should he? No. However laws rarely take feelings into account. It boils down to who can care for the child in question. Obviously the biological father is useless in that area as well as life in general.

If it were my son. I would tell him. Forget your ex wife. She doesn't matter. This child does. The child who thinks and knows only you as daddy. So you can either let the past with her mother get in the way. Or potentially forge a lifelong and meaningful relationship with this child. And give her what she would otherwise never have with her bio dad. This child is innocent in it all and shouldn't have to pay for the sins of her mother and father.

"Should the husband (or any man) be financially responsible for another man's child? " - no, not if he doesn't choose to be. He's should be no more obligated to pay for that child than to pay for any other child in the world. The bio parents are the ones who should be held responsible.

I think it's BS that he should be held liable for someone else's deceit. If the child needs to be taken care of.. force the mother (and bio dad) to take care of the financial needs. not the person she scammed

the only thing that matters is that child and the fact the father raised her for three years, from the time she was born. my take? he lacks any morals if he does not care for this child. his name is on that birth certificate. that is his child, sickening he'd even want to find out. that poor little girl :(

Money is not always the consideration. Just having more money does not make one the better parent. the non custodial parent will pay child support so who actually makes the money is of no consequence