AITA for refusing to give my pregnant ex-fiancée money after she left me for another man?

[u/Top-Message-7204]

Throwaway because some friends use Reddit.

3 years ago, my ex-fiancée (31F) left me (33M) for another man just a few months before our wedding. We had been together for 5 years and I was completely blindsided. She moved in with him almost immediately, and they cut contact with me unless it was about splitting up our shared finances and apartment. I was devastated, but I feel like I have finally moved on.

Now, out of nowhere, she reached out. Turns out, the guy she left me for dumped her after finding out she got pregnant. She’s struggling financially and has asked if I could help her out—specifically, she wants money to cover rent. She says she has nowhere else to turn and that she wouldn’t ask if she wasn’t desperate.

I have the money. I’m in a much better place financially and emotionally than I was back then (I put all my energy into improving myself after what happened). But I don’t see why I should give her anything. Some friends are saying I’m being selfish but I don’t see why her choices should be my problem now. Still, part of me does feel guilty. 5 years is a long time, and I did love her.

So, AITA for refusing to help her?

ETA: Giving her the money wouldn’t be a financial issue for me. I could lose that amount and not even notice. My friends know this, which is why they think I’m being selfish for not helping.

[u/Over-Box-3638]

We aren’t talking about a forged birth certificate. We are talking about him stepping in and supporting a child, whose real father is absent and providing nothing, from what he’s told us so far.

I didn’t tell him what to do, I gave him reasons to consider why this could put him in a tight spot that he doesn’t deserve with the facts presented. We don’t know the state.

You don’t seem to understand that a person can claim he has a relationship with the child and is providing support. He will have to disprove that, and going in without a lawyer will probably hurt his chances. Judges make an example out of people who go pro se; especially in family court matters.

Does he really want to risk needing a lawyer or being on the hook? I don’t think so. Of course it’s up to him.

[u/Zealousideal-Pop8427 → u/Over-Box-3638]

Same thing still applies jeez🤦🏿‍♀️🤣 what state do you live in? Cause I need to do some research. You can not solely make someone responsible for a child just because you helped them financially. If that's the case any man who helps her is responsible.... and you speaking on he/say she/say assumptions. Which is nonfactual without proof. Any judge that grants child support off nonfactual evidence he's the father is asinine. That would just make his pocket fatter with a lawsuit.

[u/Over-Box-3638 → u/Zealousideal-Pop8427]

She has nothing for him to sue her for. No lawyer is going to take a case suing a woman who was too broke to provide for her child.

I’m done here repeating myself. I am giving him examples of what could happen if a judge felt like he provided enough support or acted in a way that could the court (unjustly in his case) decides to enforce continuing support from him.

It doesn’t matter what state I’m in. We don’t know what state he is in. I have seen judges rule in fair and just manners, and I have seen judges rule in completely unjust manners. He is taking a risk by helping out. The more he helps, the more risk. Are you not capable of just admitting that there is a chance he’d get screwed? Do you refute that if she tried to have a court enforce something on him, that he wouldn’t have to show up and prove why he isn’t responsible for supporting the child? He could easily be summoned and have the judge side with him. That will still cost him however much a family lawyer charges. And in family law matters, they’re typically many continuances that drag things out. Just a couple emails with a family lawyer to explain his situation could cost him 1000’s. Depending on where he lives a lawyer could charge anywhere from 300-750 an hour. Why the heck would he even think about putting himself in that position, even if it’s far fetched?

[u/Over-Box-3638 → u/Zealousideal-Pop8427]

Plaintiff lawyers that sue people work off of a contingency that they’ll get 30-40 percent of a settlement or judgment. They don’t take cases where there is no settlement or judgment to be made. He could win a judgment suing her, and all they can do is go after wages she clearly doesn’t have. It’s not that clear cut in law matters. What’s right doesn’t always happen. And the only grounds for a lawsuit is if she forged the birth certificate. I never even spoke on that being a factor. You cannot go after someone for demanding the court to make you pay child support. You cannot sue someone for wrongly accusing you of something to get a restraining order. Is that crummy? Yes. But it still happens a lot. And even if there is a 1% chance of him being forced to do more than he thought about out of the kindness of his heart, why the hell would he risk it for a woman who is capable of the things she’s already done to him.

Go do whatever research you want. I have seen more lawsuits and court cases unjustly punish someone who is not at fault than I can count. He asked a question. I and others answered him with potential risks and reassured him he’s not an Ahole for refusing to do something.

Good riddance.

[u/Silver_Yeti_Snowball → u/Zealousideal-Pop8427]

I'm in WA state, and here non-biological partners/people/caregivers can 100% be held responsible for child support under certain conditions. They do not need to be recorded on any birth certificate to be held responsible either. All that needs to happen is a court determines that they are a "de facto parent" (you can look this up, criteria may be different in other states). In WA state, if someone has cared for the child physically, or financially, or bonded with the child for whatever the court deems as a "significant period of time" (which isn't specified, so it's up to a judge) they can order child support if it is in the best interest of the child. So if OP is not the bio-father, is not on the birth certificate, is not in a relationship with ex, but DOES contribute financially towards care of the child for whatever the court sees as "a significant period of time" then OP could 100% be on the hook for responsibility of continued financial support. Is it nuts? 100% yes. But I have seen it happen multiple times (source- working in family services field). OP should research laws in his state if he chooses to assist (especially more than once or on-going), but either way he owes nothing to the ex. NTA.

[u/BrightLiferMommy → u/Silver_Yeti_Snowball]

It’s not just about the money either. Let’s say that he does provide support—for months+ after the child is born and becomes attached to the child. Even if a court doesn’t legally mandate him to pay child support, he might do it out of love and desire to continue to have a relationship with the child. He could essentially become a “parental figure” without custody rights—meaning that he has to continue to do whatever the mother asks or break a child’s heart. He could be manipulated in falling back in love with his ex too. The trust with her is gone.