Quote:
Originally Posted by troutman
If this man acted as father to these children for 16 years, I see nothing unusual about this decision. The children must consider him "father". Gender of the judge has nothing to do with this.
in loco parentis
|
I think the law is wrong in this case. He didn't suspect his wife was a dirty ho, and had no reason to question their paternity.
Why should he be responsible for 16 years of child care even if he raised kids and paid for kids that weren't his.
In a logical world, she'd have to pay him back for supporting kids that she lied about.
I could see validity if he knew the kids weren't his and he accepted responsibility anyways.