Paid £11,000 over 4 years turns out i'm not the father, what can I do?

Pollycat

CookieMonster said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Gavin83 said:

 Ultimately it's the mothers fault but it's interesting how the children are blaming the father.

Its the mother's fault, but the father had a choice in how he responded, and the way he chose to respond threw away all the years he'd raised them as his own and the fact that to them he was their dad who they loved.  He basically let them know that DNA and their mother's behaviour mattered more to him than they did.  I can't imagine how awful it must have been for them.:(

Everything before the word "but" is correct.
Everything after is putting blame on a decent man who lived up to responsibilities he thought he had, but did not.
The mother has caused this, and is responsible for the the subsequent loss in the child's life. 100%. The child could have had their real dad all this time, had their mother been honest.

It's hard to say what you would have done in a similar situation but if I were one of those 2 children, I really think my anger would have been directed towards the person who caused all the upset in the first place.

That would be the woman who slept with 2 different men during her marriage to another man.

The woman who lied to her husband about who was the Father of the 2 children she gave birth to.

*Cherry*

from a childs point of view, the man they thought was daddy, who loved them, looked after them etc, is no longer there for them, their lifestyle is changing due to no more child support to the mother, perhaps they are having to move home into somewhere smaller, not so nice area, and all because "daddy" doesn't love them anymore.   Of course that is going to be blamed on the father - even if the mother doesn't badmouth him.  

Perhaps when they are old enough to be in a similar situation they may understand why he did it, but how on earth can children - even teenagers, understand that they are less important today than they were yesterday because they don't actually share blood with the man they have always thought of as their father?

I agree it stems from the mothers initial actions, but at the time it comes to light there is far more at stake than just money.

Alias_Omega

You don't need to actually create the child, to be a dad...

If my children, aged 13 & 10 were found not to be mine, I would probably still call them 'mine'. Its about who brings you up, rather than who created you.

Hopefully the OP's friend can see this, and perhaps still be around for said child in the future...

Pollycat

*Cherry* said:

from a childs point of view, the man they thought was daddy, who loved them, looked after them etc, is no longer there for them, their lifestyle is changing due to no more child support to the mother, perhaps they are having to move home into somewhere smaller, not so nice area, and all because "daddy" doesn't love them anymore.   Of course that is going to be blamed on the father - even if the mother doesn't badmouth him.  

Perhaps when they are old enough to be in a similar situation they may understand why he did it, but how on earth can children - even teenagers, understand that they are less important today than they were yesterday because they don't actually share blood with the man they have always thought of as their father?

I agree it stems from the mothers initial actions, but at the time it comes to light there is far more at stake than just money.

The eldest child was born in 1992.

The couple divorced in 2004.

The 'Father' of the children paid child maintenance for 4 years until 2008 - when the eldest child was 16.

In the article, he even says:

‘For nearly 17 years I cared for Laura as my daughter and for Adam for over 14 years and now it’s all gone.

Old enough to know and understand what their Mother had done.

wannabe_a_saver

CookieMonster said:

wannabe_a_saver said:

Gavin83 said:

 Ultimately it's the mothers fault but it's interesting how the children are blaming the father.

Its the mother's fault, but the father had a choice in how he responded, and the way he chose to respond threw away all the years he'd raised them as his own and the fact that to them he was their dad who they loved.  He basically let them know that DNA and their mother's behaviour mattered more to him than they did.  I can't imagine how awful it must have been for them.:(

Everything before the word "but" is correct.
Everything after is putting blame on a decent man who lived up to responsibilities he thought he had, but did not.
The mother has caused this, and is responsible for the the subsequent loss in the child's life. 100%. The child could have had their real dad all this time, had their mother been honest.

But he was their dad in every way that mattered, he raised them, did he not love them for who they were after all that time or was it all just down to DNA?  I can completely understand his anger at their mother but to turn round and say that they aren’t his kids, I would have been devastated too, what a huge rejection.  The trauma of finding out their mother isn’t the person they thought she was and then on top of that dad wishes he hadn’t had to bring them up?  No wonder they’ve struggled!!

Pollycat

wannabe_a_saver said:

But he was their dad in every way that mattered, he raised them, did he not love them for who they were after all that time or was it all just down to DNA?  I can completely understand his anger at their mother but to turn round and say that they aren’t his kids, I would have been devastated too, what a huge rejection.  The trauma of finding out their mother isn’t the person they thought she was and then on top of that dad wishes he hadn’t had to bring them up?  No wonder they’ve struggled!!

I wonder what the relationship was like between the not-Dad and the 2 children after the divorce but before the rumours pushed him to get DNA tests? (a period of 4 years)

Did he actually say 'they aren’t his kids' in so many words?

Did he actually say he 'wishes he hadn’t had to bring them up'?

burlingtonfl6

It's only natural for a man to prefer to have children that are biologically his. It's basic natural instincts that go back through evolution.
In general, men would prefer not to bring up the children of another man.

TBagpuss

burlingtonfl6 said:

It's only natural for a man to prefer to have children that are biologically his. It's basic natural instincts that go back through evolution.
In general, men would prefer not to bring up the children of another man.

So presumably on your view, no men ever wish to adopt or be step-parents? 
It's actually extremely common for people (both men and women) to be excellent parents to children they don't share DNA with, both knowingly and in cases where they believed themselves to be biologically related but were not. 
'Natural Instincts'  aren't really relevant - people are affected by societal norms and by their own choices.

Pollycat

TBagpuss said:

burlingtonfl6 said:

It's only natural for a man to prefer to have children that are biologically his. It's basic natural instincts that go back through evolution.
In general, men would prefer not to bring up the children of another man.

So presumably on your view, no men ever wish to adopt or be step-parents? 
It's actually extremely common for people (both men and women) to be excellent parents to children they don't share DNA with, both knowingly and in cases where they believed themselves to be biologically related but were not. 
'Natural Instincts'  aren't really relevant - people are affected by societal norms and by their own choices.

I'm not sure about 'natural' but I couldn't have wished for a better, kind, considerate & loving Dad than my stepdad who came into my life when I was about 7 years old.

burlingtonfl6

TBagpuss said:

burlingtonfl6 said:

It's only natural for a man to prefer to have children that are biologically his. It's basic natural instincts that go back through evolution.
In general, men would prefer not to bring up the children of another man.

So presumably on your view, no men ever wish to adopt or be step-parents? 
It's actually extremely common for people (both men and women) to be excellent parents to children they don't share DNA with, both knowingly and in cases where they believed themselves to be biologically related but were not. 
'Natural Instincts'  aren't really relevant - people are affected by societal norms and by their own choices.

Where did I say ''no men ever''
I said '' in general''
The fact is if you ask men would they rather bring up a child of their own or one of another man the vast majority will say their own. Women would probably say that too. It's perfectly normal and acceptable.
And you can't change millions of years of evolution. It's hard wired into us and a few decades of social programming isn't enough to change that.