What is the ruling on children being attributed to a man who married a woman who had given birth to a child out of wedlock and attributed him to the man, then after ten years, he acknowledged the child and married her, and after a period of their marriage, it became clear that she was eight months pregnant, so he divorced her, and then they attributed this son to him as well, knowing that the first son's lineage is doubtful and it is confirmed that the second son is not his, and is he obligated to financially support them, and up to what age is this support obligatory?

A child born to a wife less than six months into the marriage is not attributed to her husband. As for a child born out of wedlock (zina), the majority of scholars hold that such a child is not attributed to the adulterer. However, some scholars are of the opinion that the child can be attributed to him if the woman was not legally married to another man and no one else contests the paternity. If a man acknowledges the paternity of a child born out of wedlock, whether due to a marriage or a شبهة نكاح (a union resembling marriage), the child is outwardly attributed to him under certain conditions: that the acknowledged child is of unknown lineage, that no one disputes his paternity, that the acknowledgement is credible, and that the child is either too young to express an opinion or, if old enough, confirms the acknowledgment. If paternity is established, the father is obligated to provide for the child if the child has no money or means of income.