question for friend

[littleman]

he is at the start of messy divorce.......he has child from previous relationship he pays support for and there is child involved in this relationship but NOT his bio child........the ex is trying to get him to pay support for this child even though the ex has an order for bio dad to pay support and bio dad is still in picture........the ex has not pushed the order to be enforced and now she wants to get another order from non bio parent for the same child........can she do this.......there is huge animosity between this child and non bio parent and has been there for years........I dont think she has any ground to stand on whereas there is already support order in place and it seems she is looking for $$ and no concern for anyone but her bank account........if she wants support maybe she should have the current order enforced from bio dad and leave non bio dad alone.......need advice here please!!!!!!!

[About_Time]

I am in a similar situation, where I am paying CS for my son even though he is no biologically mine. The bio-dad is now also paying support.

At the Case Conference, the judge told me that if it went before him he'd probably ask that I and th bio-dad each pay a portional amount for my son. The matter has not been officially resolved yet, but I agreed to a temporary order under which I pay $150/mth. The bio-dad, surprisingly, agreed to pay the full table amount.

For your situation, the courts would probably make your friend pay some portional amount of CS, depending on the length of the relationship and the extent to which he acted as a parent to the child. Is it possible that his ex can "double-dip" and get paid from both? Sadly yes, but the good news is that it's unlikely your friend will have to pay the full table amount. It's imperative that he adds the bio-dad to the procedings if he hasn't already done so.

At the end of the day if your friend was married to the kid's mom, and acted in some capacity as her father, then he has an obligation to pay CS - biology be damned.

[dovan]

Unfortunately yes she can....depending on how long they were together and how long he was the primary caregiver/provider to the child.

here is a link for you to look at http://www.wparker.com/cases/nonbiologicalparents.htm that might give you some insight

[littleman]

having been through messy divorce and custody I really dont think that a non bio parent should be paying for expenses of someone else's child...........thats just not right...........
where does the bio father come into all of this.........from what I understand the child will have to go before the judge to testify what life was like with spousesz while residing in the house..........and from child point of view if he acted in way shape or form as a father then he is obligated to pay support albeit not table amount but is obligated non the less to pay some form of support........is this true if he already has obligation for another child he pays support for???

[copper]

I suppose the court (if it went that far) would make a decision depending on the following circumstances.

1.) The bio-dad is still seeing his child and the child knows that he is the father and that your partner is not.

2.) The child has always recognised your partner as the father.

Also taken into consideration would be age of the child when your partner married his ex.

It seems strange that the ex would not persue a court order for CS that is currently in force against the bio-dad but would go after the non-bio dad?? Has she not heard of the FRO?

I'm not sure how the court would handle the latter but it sure looks like two bites of the cherry to me!

[dadtotheend]

having been through messy divorce and custody I really dont think that a non bio parent should be paying for expenses of someone else's child...........thats just not right...........
where does the bio father come into all of this.........from what I understand the child will have to go before the judge to testify what life was like with spousesz while residing in the house..........and from child point of view if he acted in way shape or form as a father then he is obligated to pay support albeit not table amount but is obligated non the less to pay some form of support........is this true if he already has obligation for another child he pays support for???

Your sense of what ought to happen is shared by many. But the law is clear, as you have read above. There is an obligation if he acted as a parent. The reason is because it's about the child, regardless of how the non-bio dad and the child did or didn't get along.