I heard about a case the other day, in Texas. What happened was this guy's son was having some kind of illness. So the guy got his blood tested, to see if he could donate blood, or organ or whatever, to the son. Well, turns out the results of this test were startling indeed. The man was not the son's father. Well, the guy wasn't too happy about this, and decided to get the test done with his other children as well. The guy and his wife had three kids -- two of them were not his.

The guy had long since been divorced from his promiscuous wife, and was paying child support payments as she had custody of all three children. He took the case to court, saying that since two of the children were not his, he should not have to support those two. The judge ruled against him. He did indeed have to support them.

Well....what do you think? I think that the guy shouldn't have to support those two kids. Obviously, no matter who won the case, the big losers would have been the kids. They didn't ask to be put in the situation, and they have no control over it -- and they're going to have to suffer. And quite clearly, the wife was at fault. She behaved very irresponsibly. I can't really find fault with the way the husband behaved....put yourself in his position. Obviously he loves the kids. Well, hopefully anyways. But having gained the knowledge that they are fathered not by him, but with some other guy who was sleeping with his wife.....well, that's rough. Talk about conflict. He hates everything they stand for, yet he loves them. Must be ripping him apart.

The bottom line though, is that they aren't his kids. So why should he have to pay for them? In effect, he's paying for his former wife's indiscretion. Why should he still be responsible for his former wife's screwups? In fact, even when he was still married to her, why should he be responsible? I guess if he were a decent guy, who really cared about the kids, he would ante up. But if he doesn't give a damn about them....then he shouldn't have to. Since they aren't even his! To me, it just doesn't make sense that he should be having to support them. I mean, maybe it's best for the kids. Keep the family together, stability and all that. But I still don't really understand why the guy should be having to support kids that are not his.

Back to March.
Back to features. 1