Sabsfan2

Just a note, but you don't have to be a biological parent to win custody in court. If a person can establish that they are either on the birth certificate or have been what's called a "psychological parent" then that can trump a bad biological parent.

So, if you raise a kid that's not yours, but have provided years of care for them and acted as a parent, you have a claim to custody in most states. But it works the other way too. If you let someone put your name down as the father on the birth cert, or raise someone else's kid for years, and you get a divorce from the mother, you may also have to pay child support for the kid. It's seen as a continuation of care by most states.

So, if Dan wasn't Nathan's biological father, he'd still have a claim that he's supported and raise the kid for 16 years, which in most states would give him some sort of visitation rights, if not custody.

Not that I expect the WB to research this. Or that it will be much of an issue since Dan is pretty much blackmailing Nathan. And of course at his age, the judges pretty much let the kid decided, unless there are mitigating circumstances that show that one parent is truly unfit.

Sorry to ramble, but it's that one year of law school that creeps out every now and then. There are a lot of father's advocacy groups that are up in arms about the whole child support for non biological kids thing.

foreva_99

Going to close this.

Looks as though you might have pressed 'new topic' instead of 'reply'