Husband had a baby with assistant update

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

Best of luck to you and your family OP.

I would just advise that your husband stop trying to play hardball. The paternity test is inevitable. He needs to simply give it to her instead of waiting on a court order. The attorney simply wants to milk this case for all he can. He's not concerned about the best interest of your family.

It's clear the AP and husband want to have their cake and eat it too. They get to stay together, raise the child, but get financial support from your husband. And I think they'll have it their way. If they decide to stay together, that's on them. But your husband will still have to support his child. Usually the only time a court will refuse to sever paternity ties is if there's no one to step into the role of father. The courts will not legally bastardize a child. They will, however, make changes to acknowledge the true biological father.But you never know. As you said, it depends on the judge and what kind of morning s/he has.

As far as the child support the AP did not get for the past two years, it is very possible he will be forced to pay it. My sister insisted on back child support for the 1st 3 years of her child's life after things were finally addressed in court when he was 3. And she got it. The father could not afford the lump some but was ordered to pay on top of the original amount until the past debt was settled.

Finally, I do vaguely recall a post about you slashing Christmas decorations in front of the AP's dingy $19,000 home. But that's neither here nor there.

Usually child support is retroactive to the date of filing, not birth. But, it really depends on the judge. In this case he knew about the child and refuses to acknowledge paternity. Its going to get very messy.

Yeah, to the date of filing for an unsuspecting guy who had no idea a child existed. In OP's case--as well as my sister's--the father was well aware there was a child that could likely be his.

Was your sister married with her husband raising the child as his own? Providing medical care, food and shelter. This child has a legal father that loves him. If your sister was single, I can understand this but OP's husband's OW has had her own husband supporting the child the entire time.

She was engaged by the time the case made it to court--to a man who had stepped up and been a father figure from the time my nephew was a little over a year old. But the case was between her and the man DNA determined to be the biological father as far as the court was concerned. I advised her to take the support that was ordered and keep it moving, but she insisted the bastid was going to pay for being an ass. And he did. (Although she had a soon-to-be and now husband in the picture, it was important to her that her child knew his real father/heritage. She didn't want family secrets scarring him later. Everyone in the family knew the truth and she didn't want to live under the fear of the truth coming out someday--innocently or maliciously.)

Was the man married that she had the child with?

No, he wasn't. But I don't think that matters when determining whether or not the father owes back support.

Not OP but it actually does. This child has a legal father. Your sister was reimbursed for all expenses via back child support that she incurred because she was a single parent. A fiancé has no legal rights to support a child of a woman he is going to marry.

Let's just put it this way. I believe if AP (and her hubby) request child support and make the argument that it was denied for the first two years of the child's life because bio dad was dragging his feet, being an ass or whatever, she/they will get it. Once the court determines he is the father of the child he's known about for two years, he will be responsible for supporting said child and responsible for retro. Once the bio dad is determined, as far as the court is concerned, AP's hubby was never the legal father and under no obligation to support the kid for the first two years.

The bottom line...getting back to the topic at hand...is that this is a terrible, terrible sour pickle for all involved.

But OP, when the dust settles one day, I think it would be wise to bring the children together so they know their siblings. That is a whole 'nuther issue in my sister's story. Let's just say, my nephew (and her) benefitted greatly from him having a relationship with his (half) siblings. They became very, VERY, VERY successful. Even better, they were raised by their father to consider one another siblings; there was no half stuff going on. So when the two (half) siblings became EXTREMELY prosperous, they took care of ALL of their siblings. Their family values were just that way.

There's also just the added benefit of my nephew having a larger family than he would have. I believe the more people a child has in his life to love him, the better. And thanks to his extremely fertile father, my nephew has TONS of love in his life.

I agree with the half-siblings getting to know each other for in the future if that is my kids choice. Thank-you for this advice.

My husbands lawyer has already said that he will not pay back child support. It will be ordered from the day of filing. I have many emails from legal father saying that he is going to raise this baby and wants nothing from us. That was, until he stopped getting overtime and couldn't afford his home anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

Best of luck to you and your family OP.

I would just advise that your husband stop trying to play hardball. The paternity test is inevitable. He needs to simply give it to her instead of waiting on a court order. The attorney simply wants to milk this case for all he can. He's not concerned about the best interest of your family.

It's clear the AP and husband want to have their cake and eat it too. They get to stay together, raise the child, but get financial support from your husband. And I think they'll have it their way. If they decide to stay together, that's on them. But your husband will still have to support his child. Usually the only time a court will refuse to sever paternity ties is if there's no one to step into the role of father. The courts will not legally bastardize a child. They will, however, make changes to acknowledge the true biological father.But you never know. As you said, it depends on the judge and what kind of morning s/he has.

As far as the child support the AP did not get for the past two years, it is very possible he will be forced to pay it. My sister insisted on back child support for the 1st 3 years of her child's life after things were finally addressed in court when he was 3. And she got it. The father could not afford the lump some but was ordered to pay on top of the original amount until the past debt was settled.

Finally, I do vaguely recall a post about you slashing Christmas decorations in front of the AP's dingy $19,000 home. But that's neither here nor there.

Usually child support is retroactive to the date of filing, not birth. But, it really depends on the judge. In this case he knew about the child and refuses to acknowledge paternity. Its going to get very messy.

Yeah, to the date of filing for an unsuspecting guy who had no idea a child existed. In OP's case--as well as my sister's--the father was well aware there was a child that could likely be his.

Was your sister married with her husband raising the child as his own? Providing medical care, food and shelter. This child has a legal father that loves him. If your sister was single, I can understand this but OP's husband's OW has had her own husband supporting the child the entire time.

She was engaged by the time the case made it to court--to a man who had stepped up and been a father figure from the time my nephew was a little over a year old. But the case was between her and the man DNA determined to be the biological father as far as the court was concerned. I advised her to take the support that was ordered and keep it moving, but she insisted the bastid was going to pay for being an ass. And he did. (Although she had a soon-to-be and now husband in the picture, it was important to her that her child knew his real father/heritage. She didn't want family secrets scarring him later. Everyone in the family knew the truth and she didn't want to live under the fear of the truth coming out someday--innocently or maliciously.)

Was the man married that she had the child with?

No, he wasn't. But I don't think that matters when determining whether or not the father owes back support.

Not OP but it actually does. This child has a legal father. Your sister was reimbursed for all expenses via back child support that she incurred because she was a single parent. A fiancé has no legal rights to support a child of a woman he is going to marry.

Let's just put it this way. I believe if AP (and her hubby) request child support and make the argument that it was denied for the first two years of the child's life because bio dad was dragging his feet, being an ass or whatever, she/they will get it. Once the court determines he is the father of the child he's known about for two years, he will be responsible for supporting said child and responsible for retro. Once the bio dad is determined, as far as the court is concerned, AP's hubby was never the legal father and under no obligation to support the kid for the first two years.

The bottom line...getting back to the topic at hand...is that this is a terrible, terrible sour pickle for all involved.

But OP, when the dust settles one day, I think it would be wise to bring the children together so they know their siblings. That is a whole 'nuther issue in my sister's story. Let's just say, my nephew (and her) benefitted greatly from him having a relationship with his (half) siblings. They became very, VERY, VERY successful. Even better, they were raised by their father to consider one another siblings; there was no half stuff going on. So when the two (half) siblings became EXTREMELY prosperous, they took care of ALL of their siblings. Their family values were just that way.

There's also just the added benefit of my nephew having a larger family than he would have. I believe the more people a child has in his life to love him, the better. And thanks to his extremely fertile father, my nephew has TONS of love in his life.

I agree with the half-siblings getting to know each other for in the future if that is my kids choice. Thank-you for this advice.

My husbands lawyer has already said that he will not pay back child support. It will be ordered from the day of filing. I have many emails from legal father saying that he is going to raise this baby and wants nothing from us. That was, until he stopped getting overtime and couldn't afford his home anymore.

There are some things we shouldn't leave up to kids to decide. That's what they're given parents for. We're older, wiser and (should) know what's best. But I believe that if left to their own feelings, without being influenced by the bitterness of adults, they'll want to have a relationship with their siblings. Most kids tend to be wired that way. They don't care about adult drama; they just like having a baby sibling to play with. Of course, all of that will be determined as all of this plays out. But goodness forbid one of your biological children needs a donor one day and this affair baby is the only match.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the OP ever answer if her DH went to the drug store and did a quickie paternity test with the affair partner to determine if all this was necessary?

OP here- no and not going to. Are you a lawyer practicing in family law? He should probably follow his real lawyers advice and wait for the court order on August 11th.

NP here. Amazing how many people here feel qualified to opine on family law in the state of Michigan. Never knew we had so many lawyers admitted to practice there on this board.

I am a lawyer (although licensed in NY, not Michigan) and my best guess is your DH's lawyer is going to try to argue that baby mama is estopped from litigating paternity now that it has already been presumptively established by virtue of her marriage. Again, not knowing Michigan law there may be a time frame after which paternity irrefutable. If so, it is absolutely in her DH's best interest not to take any paternity test. There are ways such as impeachment where a lot of otherwise inadmissible evidence becomes admissible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did the OP ever answer if her DH went to the drug store and did a quickie paternity test with the affair partner to determine if all this was necessary?

OP here- no and not going to. Are you a lawyer practicing in family law? He should probably follow his real lawyers advice and wait for the court order on August 11th.

NP here. Amazing how many people here feel qualified to opine on family law in the state of Michigan. Never knew we had so many lawyers admitted to practice there on this board.

I am a lawyer (although licensed in NY, not Michigan) and my best guess is your DH's lawyer is going to try to argue that baby mama is estopped from litigating paternity now that it has already been presumptively established by virtue of her marriage. Again, not knowing Michigan law there may be a time frame after which paternity irrefutable. If so, it is absolutely in her DH's best interest not to take any paternity test. There are ways such as impeachment where a lot of otherwise inadmissible evidence becomes admissible.

Exactly, all of you prison family lawyers have no idea what you are talking about! This case is interesting from a legal perspective since the legal father will have to somehow be deemed legally not the father in order for AP's plan to work. I'm genuinely curious if the court will grant that since in some states, absent fraud, you cannot change the legal father once one has been established, even if genetic testing supports that another man is the biological father.

Moving on, OP, I am another poster that has been in your corner since your first post and don't understand all the hate you get. It is clear reading your posts that you want nothing but the best for your family and I think you are a class act! This is some hard stuff and I appreciate that you have shared the raw emotion with us as I'm sure it has helped others! Please don't let the meanies keep you from the board. There are plenty like me who are wishing nothing but the best for you and your family! You sound well equipped to handle what's ahead and I'm wishing you strength as you support your kids through this process. Onward and upward OP!!

[Anonymous]

I don't have any advice OP but just wanted to say that I commend you for being able to handle all of this and I've posted in this thread before (and forgot what I said to you lol) but nonetheless, you're a pillar of strength.

Wishing you continued luck during this difficult time in your life.

[Anonymous]

I believe the courts want to side on the best interests of the child. And for the child to have a legal relationship with its biological/real father is in the childs interest.
This is not about what is best for one family, but the kid

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

Best of luck to you and your family OP.

I would just advise that your husband stop trying to play hardball. The paternity test is inevitable. He needs to simply give it to her instead of waiting on a court order. The attorney simply wants to milk this case for all he can. He's not concerned about the best interest of your family.

It's clear the AP and husband want to have their cake and eat it too. They get to stay together, raise the child, but get financial support from your husband. And I think they'll have it their way. If they decide to stay together, that's on them. But your husband will still have to support his child. Usually the only time a court will refuse to sever paternity ties is if there's no one to step into the role of father. The courts will not legally bastardize a child. They will, however, make changes to acknowledge the true biological father.But you never know. As you said, it depends on the judge and what kind of morning s/he has.

As far as the child support the AP did not get for the past two years, it is very possible he will be forced to pay it. My sister insisted on back child support for the 1st 3 years of her child's life after things were finally addressed in court when he was 3. And she got it. The father could not afford the lump some but was ordered to pay on top of the original amount until the past debt was settled.

Finally, I do vaguely recall a post about you slashing Christmas decorations in front of the AP's dingy $19,000 home. But that's neither here nor there.

Usually child support is retroactive to the date of filing, not birth. But, it really depends on the judge. In this case he knew about the child and refuses to acknowledge paternity. Its going to get very messy.

Yeah, to the date of filing for an unsuspecting guy who had no idea a child existed. In OP's case--as well as my sister's--the father was well aware there was a child that could likely be his.

Was your sister married with her husband raising the child as his own? Providing medical care, food and shelter. This child has a legal father that loves him. If your sister was single, I can understand this but OP's husband's OW has had her own husband supporting the child the entire time.

She was engaged by the time the case made it to court--to a man who had stepped up and been a father figure from the time my nephew was a little over a year old. But the case was between her and the man DNA determined to be the biological father as far as the court was concerned. I advised her to take the support that was ordered and keep it moving, but she insisted the bastid was going to pay for being an ass. And he did. (Although she had a soon-to-be and now husband in the picture, it was important to her that her child knew his real father/heritage. She didn't want family secrets scarring him later. Everyone in the family knew the truth and she didn't want to live under the fear of the truth coming out someday--innocently or maliciously.)

Was the man married that she had the child with?

No, he wasn't. But I don't think that matters when determining whether or not the father owes back support.

Not OP but it actually does. This child has a legal father. Your sister was reimbursed for all expenses via back child support that she incurred because she was a single parent. A fiancé has no legal rights to support a child of a woman he is going to marry.

Let's just put it this way. I believe if AP (and her hubby) request child support and make the argument that it was denied for the first two years of the child's life because bio dad was dragging his feet, being an ass or whatever, she/they will get it. Once the court determines he is the father of the child he's known about for two years, he will be responsible for supporting said child and responsible for retro. Once the bio dad is determined, as far as the court is concerned, AP's hubby was never the legal father and under no obligation to support the kid for the first two years.

The bottom line...getting back to the topic at hand...is that this is a terrible, terrible sour pickle for all involved.

But OP, when the dust settles one day, I think it would be wise to bring the children together so they know their siblings. That is a whole 'nuther issue in my sister's story. Let's just say, my nephew (and her) benefitted greatly from him having a relationship with his (half) siblings. They became very, VERY, VERY successful. Even better, they were raised by their father to consider one another siblings; there was no half stuff going on. So when the two (half) siblings became EXTREMELY prosperous, they took care of ALL of their siblings. Their family values were just that way.

There's also just the added benefit of my nephew having a larger family than he would have. I believe the more people a child has in his life to love him, the better. And thanks to his extremely fertile father, my nephew has TONS of love in his life.

Yes we should have affairs and as many children as possible so we're just one big happy family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apart from all the emotions here, I'm curious how this will be settled as a legal matter. The married couple are raising the child as their own (and that seems fine with exH/bio dad?) yet they're seeking to legally sever ties from he only father relationship this child knows. All this for child support. Is that right?

It sounds like it is all about money. He'd being an idiot for paying child support now without a court order and more importantly, a paternity test. They are spending thousands on attorney's when a paternity test is a few hundred dollars. It sounds like "dad" is allowed to be the favorite uncle in exchange for cash. But, OP is saying mixed things such as mom wants dad to have the kid for 10 days a month to he only gets visits 2 weekly at a public park.

OP here- What? He is not paying child support. He has not seen the child in months. If he is required to pay child support, the kid's last name is changed to his and he is determined the legal father, he will have 30/70 custody (around 10 days a month) and 50/50 legal custody. The family court system now gives generous rights to fathers.

There is no DNA at this point. None. I have not wanted him to do DNA until my settlement was complete. She has wanted DNA all along. He did not do it because I asked him to let me get my child support in place first.

Do you really think she would go this far if she wasn't 100% sure it was his? Always a small chance but I doubt it.
My child support is in place. The child support she receives goes off the reduced income from what we get.


DNA away at this point.

So now she wanted Dna all along? When you posted about this originally your husband did and she balked:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/360/419905.page

OP here - I was lied to by my husband. Imagine that.

Convenient! All inconsistencies are his lies. Oh is he the one who came here at Christmas and claimed you attacked her lawn decorations and told all the neighbors she was a whore? Or is he the one lying now when your comments claim you never said that....

Re-read my response. I never denied taking down the Christmas blow ups or telling her neighbors she was a whore. The poster said they lived in a trailer and there was a Christmas party at my house going on at the time. This is completely incorrect. The story is partially true.

Apparently, and lucky for you, you have never been cheated on. There is a term called trickle truth, google it. Rarely, does a cheater disclose all information at once. They do a really great and super painful thing by disclosing more and more info over time. Makes you feel retraumatized with each supposed truth revealed. Cheaters are liars and most only admit to what they think you already know. What I posted the last two years is what I believed to be true at the time. What comment did I claim I never said?

No you reread my Post. I never said a Christmas party was going on at the same time. I said that in the same Christmas season as you did that to her, your husband was at home with your extended family having a good old fashioned Christmas because you asked them to be nice to him. And you did say she lived in a trailer. Why that whole thread got deleted I dont know but I am not the only one who remembered that.

As for retraumatization I imagine if you hadn't mired yourself in this for 2.5 years and kept posting about it over and over and had instead moved on and let your ex husband clean up his mess you wouldn't constantly feel so traumatized.

Says the woman on her high horse. I don't regret staying in my mess for two years. I am now stronger and ready to move on for my kids. Had I left two years ago, it would have been traumatic for my kids because I was a raving lunatic. Now, I am financially secure, have a great support system, fairly amicable with soon to be ex-spouse and we move on.

Never said she lived in a trailer. Called her "trailer trash". Quit trying to quote my past posts and move on. You, are a f$@king pathetic woman who clearly lacks empathy for others. Please move on from my post and go harras someone else, maybe your grandma or your elderly neighbor. Clearly, you are a bully.

Good for you, OP. Why exactly are you posting these updates? To bully people who don't agree with you? Because that is exactly what you're doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He should have kept his wandering dick in his draws. Now he gets to be poor.

Good luck to you.

This.

Love this!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here.

Best of luck to you and your family OP.

I would just advise that your husband stop trying to play hardball. The paternity test is inevitable. He needs to simply give it to her instead of waiting on a court order. The attorney simply wants to milk this case for all he can. He's not concerned about the best interest of your family.

It's clear the AP and husband want to have their cake and eat it too. They get to stay together, raise the child, but get financial support from your husband. And I think they'll have it their way. If they decide to stay together, that's on them. But your husband will still have to support his child. Usually the only time a court will refuse to sever paternity ties is if there's no one to step into the role of father. The courts will not legally bastardize a child. They will, however, make changes to acknowledge the true biological father.But you never know. As you said, it depends on the judge and what kind of morning s/he has.

As far as the child support the AP did not get for the past two years, it is very possible he will be forced to pay it. My sister insisted on back child support for the 1st 3 years of her child's life after things were finally addressed in court when he was 3. And she got it. The father could not afford the lump some but was ordered to pay on top of the original amount until the past debt was settled.

Finally, I do vaguely recall a post about you slashing Christmas decorations in front of the AP's dingy $19,000 home. But that's neither here nor there.

Usually child support is retroactive to the date of filing, not birth. But, it really depends on the judge. In this case he knew about the child and refuses to acknowledge paternity. Its going to get very messy.

Yeah, to the date of filing for an unsuspecting guy who had no idea a child existed. In OP's case--as well as my sister's--the father was well aware there was a child that could likely be his.

Was your sister married with her husband raising the child as his own? Providing medical care, food and shelter. This child has a legal father that loves him. If your sister was single, I can understand this but OP's husband's OW has had her own husband supporting the child the entire time.

She was engaged by the time the case made it to court--to a man who had stepped up and been a father figure from the time my nephew was a little over a year old. But the case was between her and the man DNA determined to be the biological father as far as the court was concerned. I advised her to take the support that was ordered and keep it moving, but she insisted the bastid was going to pay for being an ass. And he did. (Although she had a soon-to-be and now husband in the picture, it was important to her that her child knew his real father/heritage. She didn't want family secrets scarring him later. Everyone in the family knew the truth and she didn't want to live under the fear of the truth coming out someday--innocently or maliciously.)

Was the man married that she had the child with?

No, he wasn't. But I don't think that matters when determining whether or not the father owes back support.

Not OP but it actually does. This child has a legal father. Your sister was reimbursed for all expenses via back child support that she incurred because she was a single parent. A fiancé has no legal rights to support a child of a woman he is going to marry.

Let's just put it this way. I believe if AP (and her hubby) request child support and make the argument that it was denied for the first two years of the child's life because bio dad was dragging his feet, being an ass or whatever, she/they will get it. Once the court determines he is the father of the child he's known about for two years, he will be responsible for supporting said child and responsible for retro. Once the bio dad is determined, as far as the court is concerned, AP's hubby was never the legal father and under no obligation to support the kid for the first two years.

The bottom line...getting back to the topic at hand...is that this is a terrible, terrible sour pickle for all involved.

But OP, when the dust settles one day, I think it would be wise to bring the children together so they know their siblings. That is a whole 'nuther issue in my sister's story. Let's just say, my nephew (and her) benefitted greatly from him having a relationship with his (half) siblings. They became very, VERY, VERY successful. Even better, they were raised by their father to consider one another siblings; there was no half stuff going on. So when the two (half) siblings became EXTREMELY prosperous, they took care of ALL of their siblings. Their family values were just that way.

There's also just the added benefit of my nephew having a larger family than he would have. I believe the more people a child has in his life to love him, the better. And thanks to his extremely fertile father, my nephew has TONS of love in his life.

Yes we should have affairs and as many children as possible so we're just one big happy family.

Is that your interpretation?

The lack of intelligence displayed on this board is astounding at times.

[Anonymous]

And did anyone have an affair in the scenario you're responding to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apart from all the emotions here, I'm curious how this will be settled as a legal matter. The married couple are raising the child as their own (and that seems fine with exH/bio dad?) yet they're seeking to legally sever ties from he only father relationship this child knows. All this for child support. Is that right?

It sounds like it is all about money. He'd being an idiot for paying child support now without a court order and more importantly, a paternity test. They are spending thousands on attorney's when a paternity test is a few hundred dollars. It sounds like "dad" is allowed to be the favorite uncle in exchange for cash. But, OP is saying mixed things such as mom wants dad to have the kid for 10 days a month to he only gets visits 2 weekly at a public park.

OP here- What? He is not paying child support. He has not seen the child in months. If he is required to pay child support, the kid's last name is changed to his and he is determined the legal father, he will have 30/70 custody (around 10 days a month) and 50/50 legal custody. The family court system now gives generous rights to fathers.

There is no DNA at this point. None. I have not wanted him to do DNA until my settlement was complete. She has wanted DNA all along. He did not do it because I asked him to let me get my child support in place first.

Do you really think she would go this far if she wasn't 100% sure it was his? Always a small chance but I doubt it.
My child support is in place. The child support she receives goes off the reduced income from what we get.


DNA away at this point.

So now she wanted Dna all along? When you posted about this originally your husband did and she balked:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/360/419905.page

OP here - I was lied to by my husband. Imagine that.

Convenient! All inconsistencies are his lies. Oh is he the one who came here at Christmas and claimed you attacked her lawn decorations and told all the neighbors she was a whore? Or is he the one lying now when your comments claim you never said that....

Re-read my response. I never denied taking down the Christmas blow ups or telling her neighbors she was a whore. The poster said they lived in a trailer and there was a Christmas party at my house going on at the time. This is completely incorrect. The story is partially true.

Apparently, and lucky for you, you have never been cheated on. There is a term called trickle truth, google it. Rarely, does a cheater disclose all information at once. They do a really great and super painful thing by disclosing more and more info over time. Makes you feel retraumatized with each supposed truth revealed. Cheaters are liars and most only admit to what they think you already know. What I posted the last two years is what I believed to be true at the time. What comment did I claim I never said?

No you reread my Post. I never said a Christmas party was going on at the same time. I said that in the same Christmas season as you did that to her, your husband was at home with your extended family having a good old fashioned Christmas because you asked them to be nice to him. And you did say she lived in a trailer. Why that whole thread got deleted I dont know but I am not the only one who remembered that.

As for retraumatization I imagine if you hadn't mired yourself in this for 2.5 years and kept posting about it over and over and had instead moved on and let your ex husband clean up his mess you wouldn't constantly feel so traumatized.

Says the woman on her high horse. I don't regret staying in my mess for two years. I am now stronger and ready to move on for my kids. Had I left two years ago, it would have been traumatic for my kids because I was a raving lunatic. Now, I am financially secure, have a great support system, fairly amicable with soon to be ex-spouse and we move on.

Never said she lived in a trailer. Called her "trailer trash". Quit trying to quote my past posts and move on. You, are a f$@king pathetic woman who clearly lacks empathy for others. Please move on from my post and go harras someone else, maybe your grandma or your elderly neighbor. Clearly, you are a bully.

Good for you, OP. Why exactly are you posting these updates? To bully people who don't agree with you? Because that is exactly what you're doing.

Oh good grief! You sound like an ass. I'm not even the OP but you're an idiot and so are your questions!

It's OP's thread, her topic, her life. If you don't like it, YOU need to move on. And yes, you do come across as a bully. You come into this thread for no other purpose than to contradict, argue with, insult and harass the OP.

Unlike your miserable ass, people actually care about what OP's going through and appreciate her updates. The same can't be said for your dumb ass angry, bullying posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Apart from all the emotions here, I'm curious how this will be settled as a legal matter. The married couple are raising the child as their own (and that seems fine with exH/bio dad?) yet they're seeking to legally sever ties from he only father relationship this child knows. All this for child support. Is that right?

It sounds like it is all about money. He'd being an idiot for paying child support now without a court order and more importantly, a paternity test. They are spending thousands on attorney's when a paternity test is a few hundred dollars. It sounds like "dad" is allowed to be the favorite uncle in exchange for cash. But, OP is saying mixed things such as mom wants dad to have the kid for 10 days a month to he only gets visits 2 weekly at a public park.

OP here- What? He is not paying child support. He has not seen the child in months. If he is required to pay child support, the kid's last name is changed to his and he is determined the legal father, he will have 30/70 custody (around 10 days a month) and 50/50 legal custody. The family court system now gives generous rights to fathers.

There is no DNA at this point. None. I have not wanted him to do DNA until my settlement was complete. She has wanted DNA all along. He did not do it because I asked him to let me get my child support in place first.

Do you really think she would go this far if she wasn't 100% sure it was his? Always a small chance but I doubt it.
My child support is in place. The child support she receives goes off the reduced income from what we get.


DNA away at this point.

So now she wanted Dna all along? When you posted about this originally your husband did and she balked:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/360/419905.page

OP here - I was lied to by my husband. Imagine that.

Convenient! All inconsistencies are his lies. Oh is he the one who came here at Christmas and claimed you attacked her lawn decorations and told all the neighbors she was a whore? Or is he the one lying now when your comments claim you never said that....

Re-read my response. I never denied taking down the Christmas blow ups or telling her neighbors she was a whore. The poster said they lived in a trailer and there was a Christmas party at my house going on at the time. This is completely incorrect. The story is partially true.

Apparently, and lucky for you, you have never been cheated on. There is a term called trickle truth, google it. Rarely, does a cheater disclose all information at once. They do a really great and super painful thing by disclosing more and more info over time. Makes you feel retraumatized with each supposed truth revealed. Cheaters are liars and most only admit to what they think you already know. What I posted the last two years is what I believed to be true at the time. What comment did I claim I never said?

No you reread my Post. I never said a Christmas party was going on at the same time. I said that in the same Christmas season as you did that to her, your husband was at home with your extended family having a good old fashioned Christmas because you asked them to be nice to him. And you did say she lived in a trailer. Why that whole thread got deleted I dont know but I am not the only one who remembered that.

As for retraumatization I imagine if you hadn't mired yourself in this for 2.5 years and kept posting about it over and over and had instead moved on and let your ex husband clean up his mess you wouldn't constantly feel so traumatized.

Says the woman on her high horse. I don't regret staying in my mess for two years. I am now stronger and ready to move on for my kids. Had I left two years ago, it would have been traumatic for my kids because I was a raving lunatic. Now, I am financially secure, have a great support system, fairly amicable with soon to be ex-spouse and we move on.

Never said she lived in a trailer. Called her "trailer trash". Quit trying to quote my past posts and move on. You, are a f$@king pathetic woman who clearly lacks empathy for others. Please move on from my post and go harras someone else, maybe your grandma or your elderly neighbor. Clearly, you are a bully.

Good for you, OP. Why exactly are you posting these updates? To bully people who don't agree with you? Because that is exactly what you're doing.

Oh good grief! You sound like an ass. I'm not even the OP but you're an idiot and so are your questions!

It's OP's thread, her topic, her life. If you don't like it, YOU need to move on. And yes, you do come across as a bully. You come into this thread for no other purpose than to contradict, argue with, insult and harass the OP.

Unlike your miserable ass, people actually care about what OP's going through and appreciate her updates. The same can't be said for your dumb ass angry, bullying posts.

*clapping* thank you for saying what I wanted to say

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe the courts want to side on the best interests of the child. And for the child to have a legal relationship with its biological/real father is in the childs interest.
This is not about what is best for one family, but the kid

Not OP but why is this in the best interest of the child? OP has said that he has an intact family. Is it in the best of interest for every adoptive child to have a relationship with his/her biological family. Maybe medical information but that is about it. I know many adopted kids who are much better off having zero relationship with bio family. Just curious about your rationale.

[Anonymous]

well OP, i hope your child support weighs against the size of hers, meaning it brings that obligation down a bit.

then, you two could continue to cohabitate, coparent, maybe reconcile after nov 4th.