Topic : 12/25 Parent Trap

it should not matter who is to blame because the child is the one paying money money money what price is there on a child who calls you daddy for so long shame on him

IT APPEARS TO ME THAT IF ENRIQUE TRULY LOVED SELENA, REGARLDESS OF WHAT HIS EX-WIFE DID TO HIM, HE WOULD STILL WANT SELENA TO BE HIS DAUGHTER AND PAY HER SUPPORT.  IT APPEARS THAT THE MONEY IS MORE IMPORTANT TO ENRIQUE THAN HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH SELENA.  I HAVE SOME DOUBTS AS TO WHETHER HE TRULY LOVES HER AS A DAUGHTER, IF MONEY CAN STAND IN THE WAY AND HE KEEPS USING HIS EX-WIFE'S FRAUD AS AN ISSUE!!  SELENA COMES FIRST  UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTAN CES AND THE MONEY SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE.  SHE APPEARS TO BE A FINE, ARTICULATE YOUNG LADY AND HE HAS HURT HER DEEPLY.

Women that lie about paternity don't care about the father or the child more than themselves. They just don't want to admit that there may be another man involved. Usually this happens because they don't want to come clean about sleeping around during a relationship or marriage. Plus, all other types of fraud is against the law. Check fraud, credit card fraud, mail fraud, bank fraud, and all other fraud is against the law. Why not paternity fraud? Women that lie should be criminally prosecuted like other frauds are plus the victims of paternity fraud should be paid back in full by the mother.

     Men who have been victimized by mothers who lie about their childrens paternity to force a man to support a child that is not theirs need to face accountabiltiy for their deception.  These men have been taken advantage of financially and emotionally, and then are further victimized by the courts who force them to continue to financially support these children.  If anything the the state should be thanking these men for the financial support they have provided prior to becoming aware of the true paternity of these children, which kept them off of welfare for that amount of time.

     If mothers were held accountable by the courts for fraud in these cases and forced to face criminal charges for stealing from the men they have taken advantage of, maybe in the future, women would think twice before taking advantage of an unsuspecting victim and victimizing their children emotionally as well.

As I heard both sides of this story my heart went out to both of the victims (Enrique and the 13 y/o daughter).  I sensed that Enrique was determined to punish his ex for her actions the only way he could under the circumstances.  I also sensed that the mother was trying to misdirect her daughters' pain and avoid her own guilt by finger pointing her ex as the wrong-doer.  To Enrique's current wife - I would like to remind her that NO ONE can change or undo what has already been done, therefore, being a 'Monday-Quarterback' is not only wrong, it's unproductive.  I DO think that there is an alternate solution that would require both parties to 'meet in the middle' for the child's sake and that is this:

For nine years Enrique financially supported his non-biological daughter.  That's half of her childhood. The mother should accept some financial consequences for her own actions.  As an admission of guilt and a sign of remorse, why not accept the remaining 9 years of financial responsibility while not only allowing but encouraging a healthy and regular relationship with the only Dad she has ever known.  I honestly feel this would serve both victims but more importantly -- that this would be in the best interest of the child . I feel this compromise would suit both parties. 

I can't help but wonder what the parents priorities are, money or a healthy relationship with their daughter?  If the parents claim 'money' is not the issue, I would challenge both parents to prove it.  The mother can do this by forfeiting any financial contributions from her ex while encouraging a continued relationship with her ex and daughter.  Likewise the father can do this by voluntarily taking the time and money necessary to continue regular visitations along with whatever else his heart feels appropriate.   

Again, if 'money' isn't the motive or main concern, why not meet in the middle?