Wolfgang.

I can't comment on the USA or Germany with any experience, but I can comment on the approach of the British courts to childcare having had extensive experience of their attitudes. Not just to my situation but taht of various other people who I know.

Having said that, I have no experience of financial wranglings specifically, but I am aware that the court tends to be a fairly blunt instrument when it comes to kids.

The court will always try to act "in the interest of the child" as prescribed by european law.

The court will always choose the road that offers the child the most stability and consistency as upheaval is considered to be about the worst source of stress for a child barring actual abuse.

Once a childs welfare can be seen as having been dependant on an individual for any perod of time, the court would probably be reluctant to take away from the child what it has been used to.

If the "father" has acknowledged responsibility at the start, and not asked for a paternity test at that point, then he will most likely be seen to have made a commitment to that child regardless of biological or genetic factors.

It wouldn't (by legal definitions) be seen as "in the interest of the child" for the father to, on the one hand, stop paying and on the other hand, undermine the childs confidence in it's identity.

____________________

And now for my views and personal rationale:-

Of course this is completely shit if you are the guy in question.

It's not fair.

The real father should be liable.

What a sad unfortunate frustrating humiliating situation to find yourself in.

I count my lucky stars yet again.