Hello,
This story is very distressing. All of how it happened. This story has legal significance, and this needs to be interpreted by law experts.
When dealing with the ethics alone and when the details of this issue are truly precise, it seems like the answer is simple: the man has no ethical obligation to provide alimony. Granted, the child is biologically his, however the child was born through a deceitful act of the woman, of which the topic was discussed beforehand and she provided false information with intent.
He hasn’t done anything wrong (on the ethical plane) which would mandate that he must carry the weight of his deeds, even if he didn’t expect this to be the result. They acted with consent based on certain criteria and she acted unjustly. In order to remove doubt, it would be the same case if the man was the one who told the woman he had no sperm and was infertile and because of this she became pregnant, and the alimony claims were against her. The man would have been the one who would have to carry all the obligations from an ethical perspective.
All the best,
Rabbi Yuval Cherlow
Head of the Tzohar Ethics Center
For Additional Reading:
- Insemination with the Sperm of a Deceased Soldier
- Is it Permissible to use the Sperm of the Deceased in Order to Bring Children Into this World?
- Using the Sperm of the Deceased [Position Paper]
- What is Accepting Responsibility?