The Court ruled that, even without a genetic link, the man must continue paying child support for having established socio-affective paternity with the child, a decision based on the principle of the best interests of the child.
The Court of Goiás decided that a man who discovered he was not the biological father of a girl must continue paying child support. The case was judged by the 1st Family and Succession Court of Aparecida de Goiânia, which rejected the request for annulment of the civil registration and exemption from payment of the pension.
According to the sentence, the socio-affective bond between a man and a child has legal value equivalent to biological paternity. According to the portal people's gazette, even after the DNA test proved that there was no genetic link, the evidence of process showed that he maintained a continuous relationship of affection and responsibility with the girl, which configured the so-called socio-affective paternity, consolidating the duty of support.
Socioaffective paternity has legal force
The concept of socio-affective paternity is recognized by Brazilian legislation and higher courts.
-
Brazilian Chamber approves bill that limits land expropriation and changes agrarian reform rules three decades after the original law.
-
With the new law signed by Lula, banks are required to disclose all costs, allow automatic salary portability, and create credit options with lower interest rates.
-
'CPF for Real Estate' starts in 2026 and could change how your property tax is calculated, but the tax authorities deny a tax increase.
-
So, does paying tolls infringe on the right to come and go? Here's what the law clearly states.
It establishes that whoever raises, educates and establishes an emotional bond with the child assumes legal obligations similar to those of a biological parent.
The basis is in the constitutional principle of human dignity and in best interests of the minor, which prevails over the genetic link.
In the case of Goiás, the man registered the child believing he was the biological father.
Even after discovering otherwise through a DNA test, he continued to play an active role in the girl's life for several years.
The Court understood that breaking this emotional and financial bond would cause emotional harm to the child., who recognized him as a father figure.
Decision reinforces STJ jurisprudence
The understanding of the 1st Family Court follows the guidance of the Superior Court of Justice (STJ), which has consolidated the legal validity of socio-affective paternity for years.
The court has ruled that affection, coexistence and the intention of being a father generate legal effects as relevant as blood.
In previous judgments, the STJ highlighted that fatherhood is not only biological, but also built on daily life, and that, once consolidated, cannot be undone by mere genetic testing.
This interpretation aims to protect the child's emotional bond and ensure the stability of their family structure.
Civil liability and duty of support
By maintaining the civil registry, the man remains legally responsible for the payment of alimony, as well as other obligations arising from membership.
The value should continue to be calculated based on the the child's needs and the economic capacity of the person providing support, as provided for in the Civil Code and the Statute of Children and Adolescents (ECA).
We also pack any the exclusion of the father's name from the civil registry can only occur in exceptional situations, when the lack of an emotional bond and the total breakdown of the family relationship are proven.
In the case in question, the Court observed that the behavior of the man who maintained contact and participated in the upbringing of the girl showed otherwise.
Social and legal impact of the decision
Cases like this reinforce the importance of recognizing socio-affective paternity as an instrument for protecting children.
The Goiás decision reaffirms that affiliation is, above all, an act of responsibility and emotional bond., not just a genetic test result.
The tendency of Brazilian courts is to expand the reconhecimento of this type of parenting, guaranteeing children equal rights to biological children, including with regard to pension, inheritance and civil name.
Do you agree with this ruling by the Goiás court? Do you think it's fair that emotional ties take precedence over biological ones in pension cases? Tell us your thoughts in the comments—we'd love to hear from anyone who's experienced something similar.



If there were true justice, this woman and her biological father should reimburse the amount spent by the deceived person and also pay moral damages.
But since everything is a circus and carnival, the guy ends up being punished twice.
This will end relationships, men will no longer trust women and vice versa.
Yes, I agree with the court's decision.
But I understand the person's situation; they were deceived, ridiculed... but the emotional bond created does not break in a hearing.
For me it is a superhuman act, of overcoming for the benefit of a greater purpose.
What "greater good"? Supporting the offspring of betrayal? Such a decision is absurd. This farce of compulsory socio-affectivity should end. The mother must struggle with her child's psychological well-being.
It's absurd, the guy was deceived and on top of that he has to pay child support for a child that isn't his????? What do you mean? Is it the biological father or the mother who is responsible for this role????
If the man doesn't want to take responsibility for the child, it's a crime to exploit the creature 🤡🤡🤡🤡
Dude, the guy found out he wasn't the father and kept the kid, he really needs to get screwed, you read the whole news, from the moment he found out he should have gotten out... He messed up
Go after the biological father
I understand that the love he acquired for this child and she for him are irrevocable, but forcing him to pay full child support is ridiculous. He should at least call the biological father into the process and share the child's obligations with the emotional father.
It is our legal system, immoral, but legal.
If he is not a father, he has no obligation to the child, he has already done a lot, for the time he was deceived, I think he should receive with interest and correction the amounts spent.
The information is that even afterward, he continued to maintain contact with the child. Only later, for reasons that were not mentioned, did he decide to remove his name from the birth certificate and stop assuming paternity. Therefore, I agree with the court's outcome; he was aware of the situation.
I wanted to see if you were the man, having to pay child support for a child that isn't yours.