I'm not sure what I would do with my wife, but I'd probably continue to support the child. I'd do that even if I found out my son, who isn't even 4 yet, wasn't my son. Fatherhood is only half biological in my mind (probably something I've come to believe having been raised by my non-biological father). The connection I have with my boy is almost entirely founded on time spent together now. I'm sure some of it is biological as well, but I'd say it's lesser. I couldn't imagine walking away from the boy to never be his father again.

I know in some states, the guy is responsible for child support if he has been supporting the child, even if it's found out he is not the biological parent. The reasoning behind this is that they are looking out for the best interests of the child, and even though the child is not biological, that wasn't the child's fault. Since the child is better off with a father (they figure), then even the non-biological father will do.

Or, if the father is willing to walk away and drop contact, they can get out of responsibility for child support, but they are not allowed to go half-way. It's either father or not.

Both of them get kicked to the curb. 14 years is a long time and yes it isn't the kid's fault. The whore who cheated on me is going to have a hard time explaining that one coz I sure as hell ain't gonna.

Before the "emotional" people come down hard on me two points:

1) better to cut all ties than to let the relationship degenerate into an abusive one.

2) what about if you leave the whore-wife but try to keep a relationship with the kid, but then one day you remarry and produce a kid that is your own? A rightful heir to your estate, I'm guessing that your "child rearing effort" is primarily, if not fully, going to go to your new baby. The 14yo non-daughter is effectively kicked to the curb anyway.

RC

I know that KinkiDude specifically removed the legal dimension from his example, but I feel the example is flawed without it.

As earth-shattering as such a revelation would be, I feel it would be best to cut off all ties to both of them. The contract with your wife is for her faithfulness, and implicitly with your child that they are of your body, not that of another man with whom your wife cuckolded you.

Back to the ignored legal dimension - there is now a whole lot of case law in western countries that is virtually universally bad news for men. In almost all cases men will be responsible to pay child support for the child that isn't his until the child is an adult.

There was a case in the US of a man immediately cutting off contact from the wife and child after finding out the child was not his. In that case he was freed from child support obligations. Other men that do not act immediately are liable to pay, or worse.

Take the case of Frank Hatley (google him), a childless African American man that went to prison for not paying child support, as he was unemployed and unable to make payments. His ex-girlfriend lied to him about a child she gave birth to, and he ended up having to pay child support. Eventually he was freed from prison but only because of the unusually cruel nature of his case.

So I think my approach would be to disengage both of them entirely, then sue the mother for the money I spent raising the child - because I am going to need that money in creating a real family.

By the way, there are plenty of examples of this in nature, the cuckoo bird for example. It is brood parasitism, and even when reading about how it happens in the animal kingdom it feels like an act of extraordinary cruelty. It could very well be that the pregnancy of the unfaithful wife is no accident on her part.

What KD describes is worse than rape. Cutting off ties to both is the best thing to do without a doubt.

To put it a different way, does society expect a woman who was raped to raise a child "because that is the best thing for the child"? No. Men don't have a choice, but it's hypocritical of women as a group to suggest we "man up" because that is best for the child.

Anyway, this whole scenario can be easily avoided with a discreet DNA test early on.

It can be avoided even before that with the lingering threat that any bun in her oven will be tested for DNA one day.

When you are in the honeymoon phase is the best time to start with the stories which "happened to a friend of yours" and get her agreeing. Also tell a story about another friend who heroically escaped to Indonesia in order to avoid the child support payments for a kid which wasn't his. She should have a fear so great that there is no "moment of weakness" which she can run to later.

RC

Anyway, looking for RR to weigh in on this thread.

RC

The argument is polarized between people who have kids and those who don't... Those who have kids aren't leaving their child behind after 14 years of a relationship.

There are two parts to your children...; the physical part from you and the teaching, support, and love you give them. For the dudes without kids, it is easy to say you would walk away, but nearly impossible in real life.

There's being a parent and not being a parent, and being a parent comes with a huge amount of self sacrifice. (Pride, time, emotion, stress, ect.) If you are not prepared to work through hard times for the sake of your children, you should have any. The problem is that you don't really understand what that means until you have kids.

This one is explicitly for RC... The 14 old who is yours by upbringing but not by blood passes on your personality and mindset and values. You pull the plug on her at 14 and your work means nothing. That is a lot of lost time invested.

You never appreciate mothers' day and fathers' day until you are one yourself and you realize that your parents absolutely busted their ass for you all those years.

Well I'll be stuffed, here I am in complete agreement with RR.

Yup, RR sounds right here.