[Avodah] A question of Yichus

[T613K at aol.com]

From: "Shoshana L. Boublil"  <toramada at bezeqint.net>
>


>> A man discovers a  letter his wife wrote her lover (it was open, in plain
view) in which she  states that she's quite sure the kid is his [the 
lover's]
b/c the husband was  in the army when she became pregnant.

This is the first indication the  husband had of the existence of a lover -
or that the kid is not his. He  leaves the house before the birth and sues
for divorce in Israel.

The  law in Israel recognizes the status of Mamzer and therefore has  laws
following Jewish tradition to prevent and reduce the number of  possible
mamzerim. Therefore, without eidim, the rule "Rov Be'ilot Achar  HaBa'al" is
enforced and the husband is considered the child's father. The  law also
prohibits any attempt at DNA testing to prove fatherhood in any case  where
the result may make the child a mamzer.

The result is that the  husband has to pay child support for the next 21
years for a child that  everyone knows is not his.

The question is: Is there any way to remove  the obligation to pay child
support for this child WITHOUT making the child a  mamzer. The husband is
willing to have his name on the ID and legal papers of  the child, he just
doesn't want to pay for someone else's kid. ...
Any  suggestions are welcome.

Note: we are willing to pursue this issue as it  may be a further step
against infidelity if the lover knows he may be sued  for child support even
if the woman is married, and even if he has a family  of his own.<<

Shoshana L. Boublil







>>>>>
 
 
I don't have any halachic answers for you but to clarify the issue, you  
should make it clear that there are several separate issues -- they are not  
one issue:
 
[1] you want to relieve the [possibly] cuckolded father of the necessity of 
 paying child support for the child that is [possibly] not his
 
[2] you want the woman's lover, who is believed to be the actual biological 
 father (though there is no proof), to be forced to pay child support
 
[3] you want the first husband to be considered the father because you  
don't want to make the child a mamzer
 
I submit that you can NOT accomplish both [2] and [3].  You have to  choose 
one or the other.  For the child's sake, you need to let go of [2]  even 
though it means letting an adulterer off scot-free. 
 
As for [1] I would say by deliberately leaving that letter lying around in  
the open, that woman inflicted intentional pain on her husband, and forced 
an  end to her marriage.  You can show that she is probably guilty of 
adultery  without having to say that her husband isn't the father of her child.   
There should be something here to relieve the husband of any financial  
obligation.  Perhaps you can force the wife to pay her former husband for  the 
pain and suffering she has inflicted on him -- make the amount she has to  
pay him exactly equal to the amount he has to pay in child support, so it's a  
wash.
 
 
 

--Toby Katz
=============
Romney -- good  values, good family, good  hair


------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.aishdas.org/pipermail/avodah-aishdas.org/attachments/20120611/ecfa6824/attachment-0002.htm>