Did One Fly Out of the Cuckold's Nest?

We can read about a small, perhaps even temporary victory for victims of paternity fraud, in this ABC News report from Christina Ng.

A man who discovered that the daughter he raised was not really his can sue the biological father for $190,000 -the estimated cost of raising her for 15 years - the Connecticut State Supreme Court has ruled.

Good for the court!

Eric Fischer saw the red flags. When his youngest daughter was born, his wife Pamela Tournier's close friend and business partner Richard Zollino rode home in the limo with the new parents. For the next 15 years, Zollino was omnipresent at the girl's musical recitals as well as her eighth grade graduation. And his youngest daughter did not look like his other two daughters, including one from a previous marriage.

Fischer decided to confirm what he already suspected. He "surreptitiously obtained" a hair sample from his daughter and sent it to lab with his own DNA sample and in October 2006, he received the results that "excluded the possibility that he was the younger daughter's father," according to a court document.

Fischer confronted his wife and they divorced in 2007.

The couple's separation agreement only listed the couple's elder daughter as issue of the marriage and Tournier testified that she believed the agreement was fair and that "she believed [Zollino] was the younger daughter's father and that he had provided the younger daughter with support since and would continue to do so," according to the court document.

I have to wonder how the marriage was otherwise?

Zollino submitted a DNA sample and it was confirmed that he was the girl's father.

He was the sperm donor. Her father is the man who raised her.

In 2008, Fischer filed a lawsuit against [Zollino] seeking damages on claims of nondisclosure, misrepresentation and unjust enrichment.

A lower court ruled against Fischer, saying that he "had held himself out to be the younger daughter's father, that he had caused her to rely on him to meet her financial and emotional needs, and that revealing her true parentage after she had been led to believe for her whole life that [Fisher] was her father, would be detrimental to her emotional well-being."

Well hey, that happened anyway, didn’t it? Why can’t the courts quietly and secretly award damages along with an order that the truth not be told to the child under penalty of violating the court order? He held himself out to be the girl's father because he was defrauded. A fraud victim does not lose his or her right to seek recourse just because they were duped. They have to be duped in the first place for the fraud to take place.

Pin the Tail on the Sperm Donor

Sometimes, Dear Abby gets it very wrong. UNSURE IN ILLINOIS wrote in to Dear Abby:

I am the mother of a beautiful daughter who has never met her real father.

You mean the sperm donor?

I wasn't sure about who he was, a fact I'm not proud of.

DNA tests are a must, guys, when it comes to those newborns.

I tried to convince myself that her dad was the one guy I really liked at the time, but as she has grown older, many of her mannerisms and little habits reflect characteristics of the other guy ("Bobby") who was also in my life then. I parted ways with both men while I was pregnant.

Ever hear of... adoption when you were that age? How about, oh, contraception?

I am currently married, although we are struggling. I am now questioning whether I should try to locate Bobby to see if he is the father. I don't expect anything from him, but I would like a resolution.

Hmmmm… she writes "we are struggling" and then writes "I don't expect anything from him." Riiiight.

This could strain my relationship with my husband, but if Bobby is the father, I strongly feel he has a right to know.

Why? Sound like you never told the other guy, either - he had just as much right to know as Bobby, right? Bobby had more of a right to know back when you were on your way to delivering. It is a little late now. Let's get real. She's hoping that Bobby will be rich and more attractive and nicer than her current husband, and that she can leave her current husband for Bobby. She admits it could cause strain in her marriage, and who knows what kind of strain it will cause her daughter and Bobby? She remembers Bobby as the guy she was having sex with all those years ago. He doesn't look the same anymore, and he probably doesn't act the same.

Dear Abby’s response was wrong...

Because you are willing to risk straining the relationship you have with your current husband, explain to him that you need to be sure of the identity of your daughter's father because the man's medical history could one day be important for her to have. It's the truth.

No, it isn't the truth. The girl's real father is the guy who is paying her bills and protecting her (he shouldn't have dated and married a mother of a minor child, and now he's going to suffer for having done so). She can send the daughter to get genetic tests and have medical exams that will determine possible medical issues. No need to contact Bobby.

Then contact both men you were seeing at the time of her conception, explain the situation, and request a DNA test.

Are you kidding me?!? More havoc?!? How about having her husband contact some old flings to check and see if they have any kids that could possibly be his biological offspring?

If you let them know that you don't expect anything from them but their medical history, they may be willing to comply -- and you'll have your answer.

She can say whatever she wants. A lawyer can still sue for back and future child support, and inheritance, on behalf of her daughter.

Guys, if you know you don't want (more) children and are fairly certain that will not change, and you're going to have sex with your wife or fornicate with women who are not your wife, get a vasectomy and have it verified with two sperm counts. Make deposits in a sperm bank first if you think you might change your mind about kids.

Nervous About Tests?

Imagine if your whole life really did rest on the results of a test. Alan Zarembo of the Los Angeles Times had an article on how DNA testing is revealing lies and secrets, including adoptions and paternity fraud.

In one case, two brothers were surprised to discover they had different fathers. They confronted their elderly mother, who denied the most obvious possibilities -- that she had been unfaithful to her husband, the man they had always known as Dad, or that one son was adopted.

Perhaps she was raped. Or maybe she is an adulterer and a liar.

How many of us are not our fathers' children?

The question has fascinated researchers as a window into the gap between a society's stated values and its behavior. A 2005 analysis of 17 studies -- based on blood and DNA tests of various groups -- concluded that the answer varies depending on country and culture. But the average rate is 4%.

Some studies show as high as 20%. But even at 4%, that means one in twenty-five kids are assigned to a man who isn't really the father and wasn't given the choice.

Breaking the news falls to genetic counselors, who often must balance competing ethical imperatives.

How ethical is being complicit in hiding the truth from a victim?

Ana Morales, a genetic counselor at the University of Miami, recalled the case of a child diagnosed with a type of albinism that can be accompanied by lung and kidney disease.

The mother "told me she was having an affair," Morales said.

"She said she would be in physical danger [if her husband found out]. He had threatened her if she was unfaithful."

Morales did not tell him.

If she was truly scared that he would be violent, she wouldn't have had the affair in the first place. If she wasn't scared enough to refrain from adultery, then the counselor should not be too scared to tell the guy he is a chump who is being defrauded. The adulterous woman can go to a shelter. She shouldn't be with a man who is violent anyway. Where is the proof that he is violent?

But withholding the information means that the woman's husband lives with the false belief that he is a carrier of a genetic disorder.

That sort of information is far from benign, said Dr. Wayne Grody, a UCLA geneticist. It could convince him to give up on the idea of having children. And in the event that the wife becomes pregnant by her husband, perpetuating the lie could require unnecessary prenatal testing.

"Why would you expose the next fetus to the risk of amniocentesis?" Grody asked.

To protect a woman's prerogative to cheat, of course.

DNA testing for newborns should be mandatory unless there is a sworn statement of it being against both "parents'" conscience (religion). If the DNA matches, assign paternity to the man. If it doesn't, give the man the choice of denying paternity.

Men can now get DNA testing kits and find out for themselves. Ah, how sweet it is. Unfortunately, even if he finds out that his wife is cheater and a liar, in most places and in most cases, he'll still have to pay her alimony and pay child support for another man's child should there be a divorce – even if she is the one to file.

Leveling the Playing Field: Paternity Tests and Assignment

This entry is part of a series. The introduction is here.

Suggestions:

1. Automatic paternity tests for all newborns. There is no doubt who the mother is. There should be no doubt who the father is. Some men would rather not know if a child born to their wife or shack-up honey or girlfriend isn’t theirs, but this should be standard so that women can’t get “insulted” by the guy on whom they are trying to pin the responsibility. About 1 in 10 children are not the biological child of the guy who thinks he’s the father. That is significant. In the case of a married couple, the husband should then have a brief amount of time to decide if he will accept responsibility or divorce his wife.

2. No default judgment on paternity. Perhaps the need for this would be eliminated with the first suggestion, but the way things are now: a mother seeking state support is asked to name a man as father to their child, so that the state can be reimbursed, or she may be seeking direct child support; the state (via the county, usually) then sends a notice to the address provided by the woman, which may or may not be the address where the guy currently resides. If he doesn’t respond, TAG! He’s the father, at least financially. While the authorities couldn’t bother to verify the man’s current address before, or that he’s even really the sperm donor, it will definitely track him down, or someone with a similar name, and start forcibly garnishing his paycheck. I say: no proof of being the sperm donor, no responsibility. If this is a drain on the state, perhaps the state shouldn’t be giving handouts to people in the first place.