VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Mon 04 May, 2026 13:39:01 [ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]
Subject: Re: did you hear.


Author:
moderator
 		[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
Date Posted: Thu 02 June, 2005 10:31:37
In reply to: FQ 's message, "Re: did you hear." on Thu 02 June, 2005 03:36:41
 I'm not 100% sure, but I believe that in the UK, the mother's husband at the time of birth is the legal father, even if they divorce, and it is proven that he is not the genetic father. Blunkett apparently did go to court to get access, but it's not clear if he would have won. The over-riding factor is the best interest of the child, and it's normally ruled that a second father is disruptive to a cohesive family unit.

Again I'm not sure, but I don't believe that Blunkett could have been forced to pay maintenance, even if Stephen Quinn had divorced the mother, or even if he'd died.

I've read of cases in the US where men have divorced their wives after finding out that they weren't the bio-father of their children, but they still have to pay maintenance/alimony.

Some interesting links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fathers%27_rights_movement_in_the_UK#David_Blunkett_Story

http://www.answers.com/topic/kimberly-quinn
(which claims that Kimberly Quinn's second child is not the genetic offspring of Stephen Quinn either )
[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:
Subject Author Date
Re: did you hear.EVEN MORE CONFOUDEDSun 05 June, 2005 06:16:17

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.