"I bet you're just dying...

[2sure]

If her H can force the issue, then it needs to be done. I wouldnt want this particular issue hanging over my head.

[norajane]

I don't see why it should be hanging over her head in the first place when the OW never claimed the child was Sid's husband's and says it's not. Sid came up with the idea all on her own.

 

If she insists on staying married, then she might have to swallow the uncertainty about the paternity. If she can't deal with it, she doesn't have to stay with the man who created the possibility by having an affair. THAT is the only thing Sid has control over - herself.

[SidLyon]

I don't see why it should be hanging over her head in the first place when the OW never claimed the child was Sid's husband's and says it's not. Sid came up with the idea all on her own.

 

If she insists on staying married, then she might have to swallow the uncertainty about the paternity. If she can't deal with it, she doesn't have to stay with the man who created the possibility by having an affair. THAT is the only thing Sid has control over - herself.

 

Interesting analysis NJ - pity you are off the mark with so many things.

 

The only thing I'll take issue with at this stage though is me coming up with the idea all on my own.

 

Woman has sex with her own husband - then has sex with my husband - woman has baby 8.5 months later.

 

There's obviously some doubt there - not just doubts held by me. My H has always wanted to believe it wasn't his child but realistically how would he know (my own pregnancy was less than 8 months). He was content to let sleeping dogs lie while the child was being brought up in a family and while I didn't know about it. Things have changed dramatically.

 

It is now up to him whether he pursues a paternity test - there will be no more contact, initiated by me, between me and the OW about it.

 

S

[GreenEyedLady]

Just curious, do you think that was wrong?

 

Oh yeah.

 

I wouldn't answer any communication and reply with a restraining order.

 

It's no one's problem but the W's if her H needs a leash.

 

And I say that as a married woman.

 

GEL

[SidLyon]

Oh yeah.

 

I wouldn't answer any communication and reply with a restraining order.

 

It's no one's problem but the W's if her H needs a leash.

 

And I say that as a married woman.

 

GEL

 

I doubt that there was sufficient contact or "threat" for there to be a restraining order. The parents-in-law thanked me for the contact and told me I could call them any time. They said some very unflattering things about the OW and they told me they had problems with her themselves - what they actually said was that she was secretive and hostile to them.

 

I know she would need to first convince the Police and then a Magistrate of the reasons necessitating a Restraining Order. Here in Australia ROs are not issued just on the basis of somebody's say-so - there needs to be credible evidence that a RO is necessary. The OW did not have that. If she showed the magistrates my e-mail, what they would have seen was a very polite e-mail. There was nothing indicating any threat and there was no sustained pattern of contact demonstrating something that a reasonable person would be threatened by.

 

As I said today in another thread the test of whether an A is "real" is whether it can survive the light of day. Frankly I did consider whether she would seek a RO - there would have been some poetic justice that it would have meant her revealing to the authorities her role in the situation. She must have decided against it. My H told me she has a general fear of authority anyway - he speculated that this is because she is Russian.

 

As I've already said I won't be contacting her about it again.

 

S

[PhoenixRise]

I can not see any reason that Syd should take the word of this OW as the gospel truth regarding the paternity of this child.

 

OW was sleeping with both Syd's H and her own H around the time the child was concieved. There is reason to suspect the child may be Syd's H.

 

Women lie about the paternity of their children all the time for all sorts of reasons.

 

 

If Syd wants to know for certain and if her husband is willing do what it takes legaly to confirm paternity then OW is just going to have to suck it up and do the DNA test.

[norajane]

There's obviously some doubt there - not just doubts held by me. My H has always wanted to believe it wasn't his child but realistically how would he know (my own pregnancy was less than 8 months). He was content to let sleeping dogs lie while the child was being brought up in a family and while I didn't know about it. Things have changed dramatically.

And is that the kind of man you want to be married to? Regardless of whether this child is his or not, your husband is the kind of man who didn't care to find out and who didn't care about the child. Isn't that where your concerns should lie - whether he is the kind of man you can respect enough to be married to him?

 

If he wasn't interested in the child for the last 5 years, you can't turn him into a man you can respect and trust just because you compel him to determine paternity. Even if the test were to rule him out as the father, he's still the same guy who had the affair and who didn't care about the child.

[SidLyon]

And is that the kind of man you want to be married to? Regardless of whether this child is his or not, your husband is the kind of man who didn't care to find out and who didn't care about the child. Isn't that where your concerns should lie - whether he is the kind of man you can respect enough to be married to him?

 

If he wasn't interested in the child for the last 5 years, you can't turn him into a man you can respect and trust just because you compel him to determine paternity. Even if the test were to rule him out as the father, he's still the same guy who had the affair and who didn't care about the child.

 

You have jumped to some strange conclusions there. It's true our relationship has taken a severe blow from the A and obviously I have had to come to come to grips with the "sort of man he is" in deciding to stay married to him. It's probably not much different to any other BW who looks at all the factors in making such a decision.

 

As for the child, my H was always led to believe that the boy wasn't his and that he was being brought up in a caring family. My H still believes the boy isn't his, but because of the death of the OW's H and the obvious doubt about timing, is no longer content to leave things as they've been for the last 7 years.

 

I am not an expert in genetics but I have always heard that it was impossible for 2 blue-eyed parents to have a brown eyed child. The internet says it is not completely impossible, but is highly unlikely, except in rare circumstances. We have recently confirmed that the boy does have brown eyes; and both my H and the OW have blue eyes. Does anyone on LS have any expert knowledge in such things?

 

My H and I are thinking about the implications of this (the eye colour thing) and whether we want to go any further with it. It is mainly his decision now and I know he will take into account what is best for himself, me, our children and the impact on the boy. In assessing the latter, the wishes of the child's mother (the OW) will be taken into account by my H. It's a balancing act for him and I do trust him to come to a correct decision - at least in part because I myself can see there is no absolutely correct decision that could satisfy entirely all parties involved - and probably never satisfy all posters on LS.

 

S

[GreenEyedLady]

I doubt that there was sufficient contact or "threat" for there to be a restraining order. The parents-in-law thanked me for the contact and told me I could call them any time. They said some very unflattering things about the OW and they told me they had problems with her themselves - what they actually said was that she was secretive and hostile to them.

 

I know she would need to first convince the Police and then a Magistrate of the reasons necessitating a Restraining Order. Here in Australia ROs are not issued just on the basis of somebody's say-so - there needs to be credible evidence that a RO is necessary. The OW did not have that. If she showed the magistrates my e-mail, what they would have seen was a very polite e-mail. There was nothing indicating any threat and there was no sustained pattern of contact demonstrating something that a reasonable person would be threatened by.

 

As I said today in another thread the test of whether an A is "real" is whether it can survive the light of day. Frankly I did consider whether she would seek a RO - there would have been some poetic justice that it would have meant her revealing to the authorities her role in the situation. She must have decided against it. My H told me she has a general fear of authority anyway - he speculated that this is because she is Russian.

 

As I've already said I won't be contacting her about it again.

 

S

 

There does not have to be a "threat." If she tells you not to contact her and you continue, that's "threat" enough for the law. And it is "stalking."

 

I'm sure the inlaws were very happy with the info-it was none of their business and you interfered. I wonder how you think it helped them reconcile that with the thought of their deceased son.

 

I also wonder how you justify telling her adult son.

 

If I were her, I'd realize you're desperate and I wouldn't be nice either. In fact I'd use all I had in my power to hurt you.

 

When you fight with fire, expect the other side to fight with fire, also.

 

Your problem is your H, not the OW. If you expect the general public to police your marriage, then even you know it's not worth it.

 

GEL

[norajane]

You have jumped to some strange conclusions there.

 

The only conclusion I've jumped to is that your husband didn't doubt whether the child might really be his while he was seeing his pregnant OW, or after he was born; nor did he seem to question it or consider it for 7 years. As you said, he was content; he was happy not to investigate or deal with it in any way. Until you pushed the issue with him and with OW. And that, IMO, is cause to question what kind of man he is and whether he's the kind of man who one can respect and trust.

 

- and probably never satisfy all posters on LS.

 

S

You don't have to satisfy any of us. However, you are posting here, presumably seeking viewpoints other than your own.

[SidLyon]

There does not have to be a "threat." If she tells you not to contact her and you continue, that's "threat" enough for the law. And it is "stalking."

 

She has never directly asked me not to contact her or her family again although she hinted at it - in any case I haven't contacted her family since she hinted this, so there is no threat and no stalking. In fact her family (ie her in-laws) told me I was welcome to contact them at any time anyway so again no threat and no stalking. You are mistaken if you think I crossed that particular line.

 

I'm sure the in-laws were very happy with the info-it was none of their business and you interfered. I wonder how you think it helped them reconcile that with the thought of their deceased son.

 

I have no idea about this as I didn't contact them again - but as I've said elsewhere I think the best way to deal with unwanted affairs is exposure. I make no apology for this.

 

I also wonder how you justify telling her adult son.

 

As above - if it was the love of her life then why wouldn't she want her close family to know? Most people don't find true love a shameful secret do they?

 

If I were her, I'd realize you're desperate and I wouldn't be nice either. In fact I'd use all I had in my power to hurt you.

 

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that I'm desperate - my marital re-build is actually going very well. She may well want to hurt me but I'm not sure how she can any more than she already has. In fact I think she is desperate for me not to expose her any further.

 

When you fight with fire, expect the other side to fight with fire, also.

 

Exactly - err to sound a bit childish, she started it.

 

Your problem is your H, not the OW. If you expect the general public to police your marriage, then even you know it's not worth it.

 

GEL

 

Stating that my problem is my H is rather stating the obvious - but the OW was a willing participant - not sure why you think she wasn't.

 

Not sure why you would think the general public is involved in policing my marriage - oh do you mean when I said "exposure"? If so it's not exposure to the general public I'm talking about. If an A can stand exposure to family, friends and colleagues and the relationship endures despite the exposure then I suppose I can accept that it "was meant to be" even though I condemn the method if it involves betrayal of innocent spouses and children. It is the As that were never intended to be any more than a dirty secret that do not withstand exposure to family etc.

 

Yes I'm married to a cheater and now I know it - but so are you GEL.

 

 

S

[SidLyon]

The only conclusion I've jumped to is that your husband didn't doubt whether the child might really be his while he was seeing his pregnant OW, or after he was born; nor did he seem to question it or consider it for 7 years. As you said, he was content; he was happy not to investigate or deal with it in any way. Until you pushed the issue with him and with OW. And that, IMO, is cause to question what kind of man he is and whether he's the kind of man who one can respect and trust.

 

You don't have to satisfy any of us. However, you are posting here, presumably seeking viewpoints other than your own.

 

Well he did have an A and completely betray me - this is sufficient for me to question his trustworthiness and whether I can respect him.

 

You are right that up until now he has not questioned that he is not the boy's father - and he still doesn't really think the child is his. However now he recognizes that just because he had unfailing belief in the OW saying he wasn't the father, that this is not a good reason for me to accept it. Hence he is willing to clear this matter up in order so that I can move forward from this matter.

 

I fully appreciate that there are others in the same situation who may not need to know an answer to the paternity question in order to move on.

 

S