Re: So should she be made to pay money back ?
|
|
I disagree with the last paragraph, that he wouldnt be successful in court. I recall a previous similar case, where the not-father was not awarded compensation, but largely because the kids were still kids and the financial impost on the mother would affect the kids.
In this case, the kid is not only grown, but isnt even in the picture. No reason he cant be award compensation, frankly who cares what effect that has on her. Of course, he has to be able to prove that she knowingly deceived him, she could just say she only started to have doubts about the paternity when the kid was grown, if at all.
All the more reason for paternity testing to be a prerequisite for the dad being named on the birth certificate. People just cant be trusted.
|