To feel sad for the guy in the paternity fraud case

[moanymoaner]

Was watching it on GMB this morning and he was teary , I feel sad for him . I can't imagine finding out when the kids were older that they weren't yours! I get that the boys are standing with their mum but surely they must be feeling cross with her lies :( all such a mess for them :(

Adults or not, the DC were innocent parties.

He had emotional and moral obligations to the DC, as their father (in his care of them and in their eyes, as they grew up).

Had he solely wanted to establish paternity he could have done so via a test, with the adult DCs’ consent.

Much as I abhore the ex wife’s actions, which of course have also harmed the DC, she didn’t compromise the DCs’ privacy. He did that.

As for punishing his ex wife why shouldn't he? She deceived him terribly, not once but twice in every possible way. If my husband had somehow deceived me into raising a child that wasn't mine biologically I'd be wanting every penny I could get from him, regardless of my feelings towards the child.

And just because there are far more men refusing to pay for their biological children it doesn't mean that lying to a man about the paternity of children is a non issue.

But the adult DC were being told (presumably)by their mother that he was pursuing this in spite so why would they willingly consent to DNA test? As I've said previously there are plenty of threads on here (Stately Homes etc) which demonstrate how manipulative a parent can be, even emerging adult children. We don't know that she was manipulative, we don't know he was not a nice man. We do know she deceived him

Emeshing not emerging

If they are going to criminalise women for having children outside marriage and lying about it, then this should also apply to men.

How can a man deceive a woman into believing that she has a child?

Trouble is, seeking financial redress inevitably affected the (innocent of any wrongdoing) DC as well as the woman.

He had lived with and brought up the DC for many years: he and they had thought he was their biological father and he was their legal father and parented them.

So it was a choice between his financial interests and desire to seek redress from her vs the DCs’ interests.

I think that the choice he made was unethical because of the inevitable negative impact on the DC.

And just because there are far more men refusing to pay for their biological children it doesn't mean that lying to a man about the paternity of children is a non issue.

Good thing I didn’t say that then isn’t it?

A man can have entire other families, and deceive both sets of families about it.

@Loopytiles you do know he asked for £250k on a £4m settlement? You do know she lives in a 7 bed mansion? You do know that he said he will use the monies for the benefit of the boys?

I think that the choice he made was unethical because of the inevitable negative impact on the DC.

Stop referring to them as DC. They are adults. He is not related to them and has no legal or moral responsibility to them.

@floribunda18 and what's the relevance of that to this post? This man didn't abs that's who we are discussing, is that correct?

Had he solely wanted to establish paternity he could have done so via a test, with the adult DCs’ consent.

That was what they wanted to do initially. From what the son is saying, initially this is what was done but they refused to believe it because he didn’t do the test ‘in front of them’. Then they did a test with their father’s brother and that said they were unrelated so they accepted it. That would have to sting a bit, your kids calling you a liar when it’s their mother who has been lying for 20 years.

He had emotional and moral obligations to the DC, as their father (in his care of them and in their eyes, as they grew up).

He says he still wants and accepts responsibility for that but the children aren’t interested.

Much as I abhore the ex wife’s actions, which of course have also harmed the DC, she didn’t compromise the DCs’ privacy. He did that.

The case reclaiming the £250k has just finished. The papers have court reporters and it’s a matter of public record so they were going to report on it anyway and he says that given that he decided to give the interview to put his side across.

I had a look at the interview with the son again and there are so many inconsistencies. The ages and dates don’t match up. He says that he noticed his father was manipulative when he was 15, but in another part he says he hadn’t been talking to him for some time by this point. He also contradicts himself because he says ‘he’s still my Dad’ and then at the end he said he didn’t care that he was his biological father ‘because he hadn’t been my Dad for years. Strange.

It's like pulling teeth on this thread. Fucksake.

I made the comparison as people were talking about criminalising certain behaviour which may be immoral but is not currently illegal.

A man can have entire other families, and deceive both sets of families about it.

But that is not the same thing as allowing another person to believe that the children that they're raising are biologically theirs.

LadyBunker

I agree.

The papers have court reporters and it’s a matter of public record so they were going to report on it anyway and he says that given that he decided to give the interview to put his side across

FOR ABOUT THE FIFTH TIME, IT WAS AN OUT OF COURT SETTLEMENT WHICH ARE USUALLY CONFIDENTIAL

There was no need for him, other than an obvious desire for self-publicity, to talk about the case. And the reason given "It was to help find out who the dad really is" doesn't wash either as that is up to the children to decide.

i But that is not the same thing as allowing another person to believe that the children that they're raising are biologically theirs.

I think the deception is as bad, morally speaking.

But it is his story too. He is also a victim. Why can't he talk about it if he wants to?

Yes it's awful for the children.

Maybe the mother should have thought about that before she embarked on the affair?

A man can have entire other families, and deceive both sets of families about it.

Well a man has done in this case. Apparently the mother has indicated that the real father was married and wasn’t prepared to leave his wife. So somewhere out there a woman and probably some children are walking around unaware that their husband/father has 3 sons and their half siblings out there.

I think the deception is as bad, morally speaking.

Really? Having an affair is morally reprehensible but this is a whole other level.

Trouble is, seeking financial redress inevitably affected the (innocent of any wrongdoing) DC as well as the woman.

But they are adults. How does seeking redress from the mother negatively affect them? It's not as if she's going to have to take them out of private school and stop their music lessons. Even if they were biologically his, he wouldn't still be paying maintenance to his ex wife.

The truth being established in court can only be to their benefit in the long term, even if they don't see it like that now.

FOR ABOUT THE FIFTH TIME, IT WAS AN OUT OF COURT SETTLEMENT WHICH ARE USUALLY CONFIDENTIAL

The details of the settlement are confidential. The court filings and and the details of the case aren’t.

I think that the choice he made was unethical because of the inevitable negative impact on the DC.

She stole 4 million pound and lied. The truth deserved to come out. She is just too selfish to let it.

Would you tell a woman whose husband defrauded her for 4 million pound to let it go?

There is no reasonable way this can be spun into something that isn't her fault.

The adult children are the victims. The fact that they stand by her suggests she is a master manipulator.

I imagine in 10 years or so we will have heard from them too.

I see. It's worse for a woman to lie to one man, than one man to deceive two women and several children which may be involved.

Talk about double standards.