Did you know that in some US states, child support can be ordered as late as age 26!

[theWollstonecraftWoman]

I would think any "real man" who raises a child would love them and want the best for them. How else do you explain adopted children being treated the same as the birth children in a home?

Yeah. This is one of those sticking points for a number of guys. I understand it (kids need to be taken care of) but I also understand the frustration of guys stuck in that situation. Like I said earlier, “they aren’t really my kids” is a trope in a number of LW stories; on the other hand, it’s usually “okay, I’m not their speem donor, but I raised them, so I consider myself their father; but I still want payback for the scam that got run on me.” It’s one of those complex things that makes writing in LW so enjoyable for me.

 

[NoTalentHack]

I would think any "real man" who raises a child would love them and want the best for them. How else do you explain adopted children being treated the same as the birth children in a home?

Oh, I agree. I can’t think of more than a handful of the stories where the husband decides against raising the wife’s offspring, and those are usually one of a handful of types: the child knows they’re not the husband’s (and if old enough, are actively involved in fraud), the mother actively tries to separate the husband from the kids and they are indifferent or enthusiastic about that separation, etc. The default in LW stories is that the husband steps up and acts as father, regardless of biology. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t hurt, don’t want revenge against the mother/spark donor, etc. It’s usually less “these aren’t my kids,” and more “you’ve lied to me for years or decades.” Sometimes with the added knife twist of “you did this on purpose, and you’ve never actually loved me; I was just convenient.”

 

[theWollstonecraftWoman]

I wasn't talking about stories.

Oh, I agree. I can’t think of more than a handful of the stories where the husband decides against raising the wife’s offspring, and those are usually one of a handful of types: the child knows they’re not the husband’s (and if old enough, are actively involved in fraud), the mother actively tries to separate the husband from the kids and they are indifferent or enthusiastic about that separation, etc. The default in LW stories is that the husband steps up and acts as father, regardless of biology. But that doesn’t mean they aren’t hurt, don’t want revenge against the mother/spark donor, etc. It’s usually less “these aren’t my kids,” and more “you’ve lied to me for years or decades.” Sometimes with the added knife twist of “you did this on purpose, and you’ve never actually loved me; I was just convenient.”

 

[SimonDoom]

It never ceases to amaze me how completely incapable (some) AH participants are at understanding subtle (but still very important) distinctions.

This thread isn't about the morality of supporting one's kids. It's about the curious fact (and I think it is curious--I didn't know this) that the law can compel you to provide child support for a child up to the age of 26. Given that in the USA one is an adult at 18, that surprised me. I looked it up, and from what I can tell it's actually pretty unusual, and it's not true of all states. This rule exists primarily where the child has a disability or in some cases where the child is obtaining higher education. So it's very much the exception, not the rule.

 

[theWollstonecraftWoman]

Hey, my kid's doing fine on his own. As soon as law school is over, he can start to pay us back for all his higher education we've paid for. That was the deal, no student loans but the parent funded kind.

 

[bumpercars]

I think it's interesting that folks are talking about infidelity and incorrect attribution of parentage when the OP mentioned none of that. OP was lamenting that a friend was forced to support their own kid through college and grad school.

The issue of people being tricked or forced into providing care for kids who aren't biologically theirs is valid (if not as common as LW would have you believe), but it's a tangent from OP's post, and it doesn't change the morality of child support in general. If you choose to have biological kids, you should support them as long as they need support, which absolutely includes the college years.

 

[theWollstonecraftWoman]

Few parents in the United States pay for their children's higher education. Few can afford it. But if you pay for it, it is still the child's education. Part of any education should be the concept that nothing is free. If the parent funds the education, the child should pay them back for the education. If you don't require it of your child that's your choice. My son got a few grants, a scholarship, and did work part-time through college. We will fund law school, but all of his educational cost we funded, or will fund, will payed back interest free. If you don't teach them to pay their debts, they wont. What we have spent on his education can't earn interest. That's okay, we are cool with that. But he will pay it all back. If he doesn't, he hasn't learned what it takes to make it in the real world.