Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article

from Shania Sunday, March 14, 2004 - 18:47 (Agree/Disagree?) You cannot get child support (or back child support) after the age of 18. I have researched this and spoken to lawyers about it. Once the child has turned 18, there is nothing the child or the mother can do to obtain money from the biological father. If the biological father was rich, the only thing you could do is possibly take him to court to try to get some of his money (but not on the grounds of back child support). But it would be an expensive legal procedure and you would probably lose, especially if you cannot prove that the father even knew that he had a child. (reply to this comment)

from geo Friday, March 12, 2004 - 15:03 (Agree/Disagree?) In america, at least, the parent whos name is on the birth certificate is responsible for child support if they lose custody in a divorce, that is regardless of whether or not he was the actual father. So in your case unless your biological fathers name is on your birth certificate your out of luck, and in any case court ordered child support would go to the mother. (reply to this comment)

From Friday, March 12, 2004, 15:33 (Agree/Disagree?) What about DNA testing?(reply to this comment)

From geo Saturday, March 13, 2004, 19:00 (Agree/Disagree?) DNA Testing isnt a factor in child support.(reply to this comment)

From Spat Saturday, March 13, 2004, 20:19 (Agree/Disagree?) Wrong Geo, DNA testing can be used to determine paternity, a high profile case involving Daryl Strawberry is presently in court. Problem is DNA testing can only be done if ordered by the court, or consented by the individuals involved. Besides that depending on the country there are laws that determine that if the woman is married at the time of the conception the biological father is not responsible for the child. This is not the case in the US, but in some countries it is. Reason I know this is because I have been thru it being a Jesus baby myself. I had different name listed as father in my birth certificate, DNA determined my biological father (he fully cooperated and as far as he was concerned there was never a paternity issue but in order for the INS to believe my story it had to be proven thru DNA), anyways good luck to anyone out there trying to find their fathers.(reply to this comment)

From geo Monday, March 15, 2004, 00:13 (Agree/Disagree?) well im glad you found out who your real daddy was but what you thought that had to do with child support laws in america i'm not sure. child support laws in america are based on a 500 year old english doctrine that assumes the husband is the legal father to any child born to his wife during marriage, the exception being single mothers. obviously this isnt a popular law in modern times especially considering that there are numerous cases were the father after a divorce finds out by dna testing that he wasnt the childs father but is still required to pay child support because the childs welfare is considered more important then the fact that his wife cheated on him. of course this isnt the case in every country but as usual america's a little behind the power curve but with the pressure from fathers rights groups its possible these laws could be amended in the near future.(reply to this comment)

From geo Monday, March 15, 2004, 00:12 (Agree/Disagree?) well im glad you found out who your real daddy was but what you thought that had to do with child support laws in america i'm not sure. child support laws in america are based on a 500 year old english doctrine that assumes the husband is the legal father to any child born to his wife during marriage, the exception being single mothers. obviously this isnt a popular law in modern times especially considering that there are numerous cases were the father after a divorce finds out by dna testing that he wasnt the childs father but is still required to pay child support because the childs welfare is considered more important then the fact that his wife cheated on him. of course this isnt the case in every country but as usuall america's a little behind the power curve but with the pressure from fathers rights groups its possible these laws could be amended in the near future.(reply to this comment)

From Ne Oublie Saturday, March 13, 2004, 20:59 (Agree/Disagree?) I'm not too clear on exactly what happened in your story - but was your biological father forced by the court to pay you child support? You said that he was cooperating, if so, I don't see why the court (or DNA) would have been required? Or did you mean that he was only cooperating to prove that he wasn't your father? In many cases I wouldn't be surprised if the 'fathers' would actually willingly give you support - without having to take them to court and all. I know of a couple of cases like that, where the fathers of 'Jesus Babies' gave a considerable amount of money to their illegitimate children of their own volition.(reply to this comment)

From Spat Saturday, March 13, 2004, 21:11 (Agree/Disagree?) Child support was never an issue I was 18 at the time, the reason for establishing paternity was nationality he is an American citizen I was never registered as one so in order to work out legal residency in the US paternity had to be established. Child support would be very difficulty, dare I say impossible if the child is over 18 years of age and even if he is younger child support goes to the mother. It’s really not an option. My point is that Geo’s statement is incorrect DNA can be used to determined paternity, and can be used to established child support thru it if the child is still under the age of 18 and therefore in need of a legal guardian/provider.(reply to this comment)

from Nick Friday, March 12, 2004 - 10:11 (Agree/Disagree?) If you are hoping that you can sue him for back child support, forget it. I mean how can you force him to pay something that he was never asked for in the first place? Did your mom ever formally request anything from him? Did the court ever ask him to pay anything? (reply to this comment)

From Joe H Friday, March 12, 2004, 14:04 (Agree/Disagree?) I'll wait for Nancy to give the definitive word on this, but just so I'll look good when she does, let me say that I'm pretty sure there is no statute of limitations on child support, and it doesn't matter if you didn't know what you were getting into. It's owed to the child, plain and simple. (reply to this comment)

From moon beam Friday, March 12, 2004, 14:20 (Agree/Disagree?) Correct Joe H. When I split from my son's father he refused to give me any money. He tried to get out of paying, changed his name so he could not get caught-wrong! They found him and he has had to pay every penny that he should have payed for the last 10 years. (reply to this comment)

From Nick Friday, March 12, 2004, 15:25 (Agree/Disagree?) No, Joe is incorrect in this case. We are talking about cases that have never seen the inside of a court house. Your case is totally different in that it had been through the court system, he was ordered to pay support and he never did. In your type of case you can get that back child support years later and I think even with interest. However it goes to the mother and not the child. I just spoke to my lawyer to make sure I am not mistaken here and I was correct. If the mother never filed for child support and the kid is now older than 18 you can't go to the guy and claim child support for that last 18 years. That’s the mothers dumb fault for not claiming in the first place. Now in some VERY rare cases they can get some limited compensation but certainly not full back child support and only if the mother can prove that she made a best effort attempt to locate the father and the father actively avoided the mother. Just moving to a different state and not leaving a forwarding address is not considered "actively avoiding" the mother. Not to mention the legal costs this would accrue as this would be a hard thing to prove anyway. On a personal note, why don’t we look at a few points here. Some rich businessman gets a hooker, (and lets face it, that’s what most FFing was.) and this hooker is “going for the gold”, doesn't use protection and gets pregnant. The woman then fucks off all over the world dragging the kid well out of reach of this man so the even if he wanted to get to know the kid or try make amends he never could. And then 20 years later you want child support? How is that Justice? Yes it's unfair for the kid to have not had that extra financial support growing up, but that’s the stupid mothers fault for not asking for it. (reply to this comment)

From Nancy Saturday, March 13, 2004, 21:14 (Agree/Disagree?) No, Nick, you're the one that is wrong. I don't have to speak to a lawyer because I am one. A mother can most certainly get child support for years in which a father paid nothing. It's called past maintenance. There doesn't have to be any child support order in place to get it, either. A mother doesn't have to make any showing that she attempted to find the father and force him to pay. She doesn't have to show any such thing. What is needed is for the mother to have receipts for her expenses for the child. This includes rent, utilities and medical, along with clothing, food and toys. The father is usually ordered to pay 50% of these expenses, sometimes more depending on the mother's income. Again, this is completely separate and apart from monthly child support payments or back child support, aka arrearages. Further, all these amounts are paid to the mother for the expenses of the child. They are not paid to the child, and there is no requirements on how the mother spend this money. She is, if she is the custodial parent, fully responsible for the child's expenses, anyway. Further, I find your analogy absurd and offensive. You know nearly nothing about the law and you seem to be projecting your own pent up frustration on other mothers and children. Regardless of your distorted perceptions, the law entitles a mother, or father if he is the custodial parent, to financial support. That parent's intelligence has no bearing on that right. If your opinion was the case, there would be far less children being supported in this world, especially among the children of Family parents. Being "stupid" is not an element of child support.(reply to this comment)

From Wolf Saturday, March 13, 2004, 23:28 (Agree/Disagree?) Unfortunately if the mother was in TF she probably has no receipts and probably didn’t pay for anything herself.(reply to this comment)

From Nancy Saturday, March 13, 2004, 21:42 (Agree/Disagree?) Further, another very important reason to establish paternity is for social security. If a child's parent dies, that child is entitled to their parent's social security, but paternity must be established. A legitimized child also has inheritance rights, even if they are forgotten in a will or if the parent dies intestate, without a will. I would encourage anyone to pursue establishing paternity. If that parent has a wrongful death claim as a result of someone else's negligence, the proceeds go to the heirs, meaning any children. If the parent has a social security disability claim, a child receives payments, as well. Establishing paternity is the key to receiving various types of support for which a child is entitled. It is never too late to establish paternity, at least until the parent dies. Further, if a parent is unwilling, there is court action which can order paternity testing, which is not difficult to obtain. It is not a difficult showing. Again, the actions of a child’s mother have no bearing on any of these matters. A mother could have deceived a father into having sex with her and then gotten pregnant, and it does NOT matter. A child is entitled to support regardless of the mother's actions. On a personal note, I find it appalling that we even give a place to such ridiculous accusations. It is only a desperate, irresponsible and immature male attempting to avoid his legal obligations who refuses to pay child support and does so in such a despicable manner as to attempt to claim that the actions of a mother or her intelligence or lack there of should have any bearing on his obligation. In fact, the law has the opposite provision. The law allows a mother to have her attorney's fees paid by a father who willfully refuses to pay child support. All that is required to make a showing of willful refusal is that the child is alive and the father was informed, and he has not sufficiently supported the child. Let me also add that deadbeats are not just male, I reserve the term men in this instance. Deadbeats are also female. Yet, the vast majority of deadbeats are male. Yet, all deadbeats are selfish and self-absorbed, so much so that the livelihood of their very own children is not important enough to them to do the right thing. Anyone who can turn their back on their own child, regardless of how he or she came into the world or who his or her other parent is or does, is a reprobate. (reply to this comment)

From Jules Sunday, March 14, 2004, 02:13 (Agree/Disagree?) IMO one of the key issues here is that, despite what was taught us, sex does actually mean something. While I do not believe that sex should always be with someone you "love", or cannot be a wonderful experience in itself, there are responsibilities that go along with it, the least of which is to use birth control and practise safe sex. While I have the utmost of respect for people who have children and are good parents, I also think that those of us who do not have children, because we have made a decision that this is not what we want or are able to do at this point in our lives, should also be applauded. Hooray for those of us who did not have unprotected sex. Hooray for those of us who did not get married when we were too young. Hooray for those of us who choose not to have a child because we knew that we could not, at that point in our lives, be the parent our child would deserve. I think the bad choices we did not make should be celebrated as much as the good choices we did make. In the Family I dated a young man from when we were both 13 to 17. He was my first, and to this day is one of the kindest, decent and most good-looking people I have ever met. He had the body of a god, and when he took of his shirt, let alone his pants ;), I (and any girl within a five mile radius) swooned. We became engaged when we were both 16, and after a year, and a week before we were supposed to be married, I decided I could not go through with it. I knew that within the limited choices of the Family, he was a very, very "good catch". I just thought that I was too young to make such a decision, and as much as I cared about him, I panicked whenever I thought about actually marrying him and having his children. There was so much that I didn't know and had never experienced and I just didn't think it would be fair to either of us for us to lock us into breeding and being a "family" when we were both still children ourselves in so many ways. In the years since leaving the Family it has not always been easy to be on my own. I have often thought of the choice I made and wondered what my life would have been like if I had been with someone who cared for me the way my first love did. He married someone else and they now have four children. They have only just left the Family, and given my mindset, that would probably have been me now. It was one the most difficult decisions I ever made, yet I think I made the right choice. It has not been easy to walk my own path alone, but I would rather do that than live a lie, and I salute all those who have made the same decision, whenever that decision was made. We all make choices in life, and usually make them based on information that is available to us at the time as well as our own beliefs about life and ourselves. We all also live with the choices we make and do the best we can with what we have. Someone here, and I cannot remember whom, said something to the effect of women will always be selfish and self-centred until they have children of their own. I beg to differ on this issue. (To state the obvious, what about men? Women alone are "saved through childbirth"?) I have a number of (non exFamily) friends who have had children for exactly those "self-centred" reasons. They wanted someone to love them. They wanted to feel secure in their relationship with their husband or significant other. They wanted someone they could control. People are who they are and whether or not they are a parent doesn't make them more or less egocentric. Sex, while it certainly can be casual, is never not significant. Every time a man ejaculates during intercourse without protection he is not only exposing himself and his other partners to potential medical risk, he (and his partner) is also making a decision to perhaps produce another human being from their encounter. We have enough matter in our frontal lobes that whatever hormones or blood loss from the brain flood our systems, we are responsible for those decisions, as we are for all of our decisions as adults now. It does mean something. (reply to this comment)

From Wolf Sunday, March 14, 2004, 12:27 (Agree/Disagree?) “What about men?” Men continue to be selfish bastards even after having kids...or so the story goes.(reply to this comment)

From Nancy Sunday, March 14, 2004, 11:20 (Agree/Disagree?) I absolutely agree! The decision to not have children is not a selfish one. It is a very thoughtful one, and in every case I've seen, a mature one. Knowing that one is not prepared to be a parent is evolved and often unselfish. Considering what it takes to raise a child and realizing that there are not enough resources at ones disposal to do so is very responsible and mature. I can say this for many of us. Many of us need to be cared for ourselves. We had our childhoods stolen from us. Many of us grapple with unresolved pain. Many of us struggle to catch up in our careers and education. Sadly, many of us have yet to find security in our lives, meaning we have not yet found emotional security and support for ourselves. We have years to make up for from our past, years to decide who we are and what place we want for ourselves in the world. Many of us are still carving out our own nitch. Many of us just struggle to care for ourselves with little or no support system. Realizing our own limitations and striving to improve our lives despite our setbacks by the Family is a mark of strength. Deciding to provide for ourselves and our own security before having to divide what little there is with a child is smart. I have education and a good career, but when birth control failed for me, I struggled from the very beginning to provide for my son. I still struggle. There are never enough resources. What there is even less of, due to the Family's scar on my life, is a support system outside of me and what few loyal friends I have. There is no family to call when my son is sick and needs to go to the hospital. There is no loving mother and grandmother for me to call when I am heartbroken and need advice. There is no father or grandfather for Todd and I to look to or to take him to the park and teach him how to play ball. There is no family to ask for help in financial emergencies or during a move. My son depends completely on me, and I depend completely on myself and a few close friends who I have made and who are loyal and loving and the only real family we have. When it is possible to foresee all this and realize that an individual does not want to have to go through what we have, or worse, and wants rather to get their own life in order before bringing a child into the world and makes decisions accordingly to have protected sex, then that has to be rational, logical and intelligent. Properly preparing for a child in order to give him or her a good life, better than what we knew is loving and unselfish. We have worth in ourselves and do not need to procreate in order to bring something to the world or leave a mark. Our own lives are important. We don't have to have children to make them important. Many of us are destined to do something great and make a difference in the world. We don't have to leave that opportunity to our children. Once a child is in the world, it is a huge responsibility which consumes our whole lives. It takes sooooooo much to raise them. I know many parents who wish they had a few more years before having to dedicate themselves to their children. I also know many SGA parents who are model parents. They work harder than most people to give their children all we didn't have. It is far from easy. But, all that to say, it is not necessarily true that parents are better or more loving or unselfish people than those of us who have chosen not to have children. The choice not to have children can be just as intelligent, rational and unselfish. Besides, many, if not all, of my dearest friends, who have been such a tremendous support to me and my son are single and childless. Many of them support me and love him like the missing parent or family in our lives. My son and my life is greatly enriched by them, and I can honestly say we would have never made it without them. My single, childless friends have been more to us than my son’s father, who abandoned us, ever could have been. They have supported us with their time, their money and their love. I could never repay them for their perfectly timed support which always helped us make it through somehow. Seeing that they are not related to us by blood, I would call them the ultimate of unselfish, kind, caring and loving. They are parents to a little boy, by their own choosing, one who doesn’t call them mommy or daddy. (reply to this comment)

From itsxena2u Sunday, March 14, 2004, 13:39 (Agree/Disagree?) I also don't agree that all women are selfish and self-centered until they have children of their own. Having children does not automatically make a man/woman mature and responsable. I've known a few parents who were quite immature, self centered, irresponsible and quite selfish to say the least. When you said "I have education and a good career, but when birth control failed for me, I struggled from the very beginning to provide for my son. I still struggle." My thought was this: When birth control failed for you, you could have taken what some people consider "the easy way out" and have an abortion, but you decided to take the brave step and bring this child into the world. I'm sure this is a decision you don't regret till this day no matter how much you had to struggle. In my opinion, you decided to have this child even though you hadn't planned on having on just yet, because you knew you were capable of being a good mother. That's takes a lot of guts, hard work, sacrifice and a great deal of love. Two thumbs up for you! And when I say that some people consider abortion an "easy way out". A lot of times it is not. I personally have never had an abortion but I have people very close to me who have. To some it has been a painful experience. I don't look down or condemm women who decide to have an abortion because they feel they cannot handle a child feel that they are not ready to be parents. This is also a mature decision on their part as well. I think admitting that you are not ready to become a parent is also mature. I not sure what everyone's feelings are on this subject, but I feel that if a woman decides to have an abortion or give birth to the child (even if it means becoming a single mom) it is a very personal decision and no one should judge her. (reply to this comment)

From Wolf Sunday, March 14, 2004, 12:46 (Agree/Disagree?) I think almost everyone with brains agrees on this. The problem is, if Darwin’s natural selection theory is true, Homo sapiens (that’s us) are on a downward turn and have been for at least a century. Natural selection is supposed to filter out negative traits by giving those with superior traits greater opportunity to survive. For thousands or hundreds of thousands of years, natural selection has been improving humans because the smart and wealthy were more likely to have offspring who survived. These days, however, the progeny of the intelligent and rich are less likely to propagate, because they’re the ones who are using birth control, while the poor and stupid are having babies galore. I fear for the human race.(reply to this comment)

From frmrjoyish Sunday, March 14, 2004, 17:19 (Agree/Disagree?) Lucky for us natural selection is not as facile as Wolf would have us believe!(reply to this comment)

From Wolf Monday, March 15, 2004, 00:07 (Agree/Disagree?) True, but my silly little hypothesis still applies after taking the other factors into consideration. Modern medicine, social security, lopsided population growth distribution and a host of other factors are phasing out natural selection in favor of intentional selection, in the human race. (reply to this comment)

From Alf Sunday, March 14, 2004, 07:07 (Agree/Disagree?) one and a two and a... Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate. Every sperm is wanted. Every sperm is good. Every sperm is needed In your neighbourhood. Hindu, Taoist, Mormon, Spill theirs just anywhere, But God loves those who treat their Semen with more care(reply to this comment)

From Albatross Sunday, March 14, 2004, 14:07 (Agree/Disagree?) The Complete lyrics There are Jews in the world. There are Buddhists. There are Hindus and Mormons, and then There are those that follow Mohammed, but I've never been one of them. I'm a Roman Catholic, And have been since before I was born, And the one thing they say about Catholics is: They'll take you as soon as you're warm. You don't have to be a six-footer. You don't have to have a great brain. You don't have to have any clothes on. You're A Catholic the moment Dad came, Because Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate. Let the heathen spill theirs On the dusty ground. God shall make them pay for Each sperm that can't be found. Every sperm is wanted. Every sperm is good. Every sperm is needed In your neighbourhood. Hindu, Taoist, Mormon, Spill theirs just anywhere, But God loves those who treat their Semen with more care. Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted,... ...God get quite irate. Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is good. Every sperm is needed... ...In your neighbourhood! Every sperm is useful. Every sperm is fine. God needs everybody's. Mine! And mine! And mine! Let the Pagan spill theirs O'er mountain, hill, and plain. God shall strike them down for Each sperm that's spilt in vain. Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is good. Every sperm is needed In your neighbourhood. Every sperm is sacred. Every sperm is great. If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite iraaaaaate! (reply to this comment)

From Banshee Monday, March 15, 2004, 09:28 (Agree/Disagree?) LOL! Forgive the ignorance, but who sings this/wrote this? (reply to this comment)

From Dan Savage Monday, March 15, 2004, 14:20 (Agree/Disagree?) It's from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life Lyrics MICHAEL PALIN & TERRY JONES Music ANDRE JACQUEMIN & DAVE HOWMAN(reply to this comment)

From Peter Monday, March 15, 2004, 07:45 (Agree/Disagree?) Here is the mp3 http://images.frouman.net/EverySpermIsSacred.mp3(reply to this comment)

From nobody Sunday, March 14, 2004, 08:31 (Agree/Disagree?) Does that include self-gratification? (reply to this comment)

From Bella Saturday, March 13, 2004, 11:31 (Agree/Disagree?) Uhhh since the "rich businessman" could have avoided getting the "hooker" pregnant (for example:by using a condom), your blaming the woman for falling pregnant due to "going for the gold" is not fair. (reply to this comment)

From Cleppo Saturday, March 13, 2004, 00:32 (Agree/Disagree?) I don't mean to be rude but, since I did not get into the details of my personal situation I found it incredible that you somehow knew so much about them. Your re-enactment was offensive since "lets face it" you are talking about my mother. While I appreciate any legitimate advise you may have, as a student of law myself the basic information you threw out was useless. Thank you however for trying, and don't let me discourage you from trying in the future. (reply to this comment)

From Ne Oublie Saturday, March 13, 2004, 06:06 (Agree/Disagree?) Nick didn't have to know the details of your personal situation to make that description. I don't think his intention was even to describe your specific story, rather he was outlining a scenario which occurred repeatedly all over the world because of TF's practice of FFing. As a law student you probably already know more about this topic than most of us - except Nancy, and perhaps a few others who have chosen that career.(reply to this comment)

From moon beam Friday, March 12, 2004, 14:24 (Agree/Disagree?) p.s........Ha Ha Ha Ha HA! Sucker!(reply to this comment)

From Spat Friday, March 12, 2004, 11:45 (Agree/Disagree?) And our resident, single, part time dad weighs in...(reply to this comment)

From Nick Friday, March 12, 2004, 13:30 (Agree/Disagree?) Well actually I am not speaking from a "what’s fair" point of view, but from a legal stand point. I really don't think that it's possible to sue someone for back child support when there was never an order for him to pay in the 1st place. Even then, the mother would have to do this and then you would get into the fact that she gallivanted all over the world with you and he wasn't even aware that he had a kid in the 1st place. I could be wrong there, but I don’t think so. (reply to this comment)

From Joe H Friday, March 12, 2004, 21:54 (Agree/Disagree?) No, Nick, you're speaking from a "what Nick thinks is fair" viewpoint, and you're throwing in your own theories on the law to back it up. I'll let Nancy debate law with you, but I'd like to call your idea of what's fair into question: Whose side are you on? Wouldn't you rather let some poor cult kid get some money from his/her biological father? Or do you sympathize more with the lonely businessman who fucked a "hooker" (your words) without a condom? You think the "stupid mother" should get all the blame? You misogynist prick! I think all those "kings" should be rounded up and forced to pay into a massive scholarship fund for Jesus babies, and you should be forced to administrate it pro bono, for the comments you made today! Obviously, this course of action isn't legally feasible, but I do commend and encourage anyone going after their biological parents to get what's owed to them. (reply to this comment)

From makingupforlost time Saturday, July 10, 2004, 18:45 (Agree/Disagree?) This whole thread is very fascinating to me. I know that my situation is relatively different than the scenario detailed above as I am an"SGA" who was a single mother of children fathered by a fellow "SGA". Unfortunately, my talents where somewhat less useful by leadership standards & he wasn't compeled to marry me being "needed" elsewhere. Being the low self-esteeming person that I was, did have my pride, however & decided I would "show" them what a damned good parent I could be. 9 months later found me the shocked 19 yr. old mother of beautiful twin girls. I don't ever regret the decisions I made or the lack of foresight on my part & I would not change a thing if it would mean not having them in my life. I do however, wonder if views change when it's one of your own who do the "skipping out" with out a moments thought as to how your flesh & blood is faring as you go on your merry way through life. What about all the "Jesus babies" who's fathers are now roaming the country doing whatever the hell they please. I never asked my daughters father for anything & maybe that is part of the problem. I never considered that he would just one day come & tell them good-bye & never write or call or even inquire about their health, education & well being. The last time we've heard from him was 6 years ago. How do I go about looking for him & getting what is due to them without looking like the bad guy? How do I, as a parent, tell my children that their dad never cared enough to be a part of their life, how is that going to affect their self-esteem? One consolation I guess is that, unlike him, I get to see them grow, learn, mature & he will be forever wondering.(reply to this comment)

From Vicky Friday, March 12, 2004, 12:59 (Agree/Disagree?) Tsk, tsk, Spat! I think that's a bit much - How do you know he is a 'single, part time dad' by choice? (reply to this comment)

From Ne Oublie Friday, March 12, 2004, 10:38 (Agree/Disagree?) Nancy would probably know better, but if you're still underage I think you might have a chance to claim something - if you could prove parentage. Once you're 18 (or whatever the legal age in your country is) I don't think you'd have much of a case, though. If you're from the FFing era, then you're probably too old.(reply to this comment)