In 1968, the sixth year of the lawful marriage between the husband Jacques Paul Pascal Marie Ghislain Boël and the wife Sybille Michèle Emilie Marie Ghislaine de Selys Longchamps a daughter has been born: Delphine Michèle Anne Marie Boël.
This daughter has been registered by her father at the Town Hall in Uccle as being
his daughter born inside
his marrriage with
his lawful wife. That is it. He was and
is and remains her father, to the day of today.
Never, ever a civil registrar has ever requested a DNA-proof for registration. When on the 22nd of February 1968 this father arrived at the town hall and declares that Delphine is his daughter, and he has never detested it, to the day of today, then he
is her father for law. It is really not so hard to understand.
IMO Mr. Boel was part and parcel to the whole deception all along, so he has no right to expect privacy when helping cover up the personal indiscretions of a world known person. A wise person, concerned for his honor, would fear that sooner or later the cat would be out of the bag. I'd bet he profited from helping in the cover-up, too. Delphine is the only innocent here. She didn't want to continue to live a lie and she refuses to be seen as the unfortunate bi-product of a clandestine relationship, again just my opinion.
It is possible that Mr Boël only later discovered that Delphine was a product of a liaison of his spouse. It is also possible he discovered the relationship before Delphine was born. In any way he has not thrown his spouse on the street, saving her a deep and humiliating fall in the conservative
haute société (we are talking about the Belgian aristocracy in the 1960's).
Maybe because he simply adored his wife and forgave her liaison? Maybe because he saw Delphine and his fatherless heart melted by seeing the little baby? Who knows? He has behaved utmost gentlemanlike, until the very day of today. Your "part and parcel" description is an unneccessary defamation this gentleman has not deserved. As only one he has kept the utmost discretion.
The same counts for the "accused", the King, by the way. No word he has uttered in public towards Delphine or her mother.
No word. Not when she again trashed him in media, not when she and her mother again revealed claimed indiscretions in TV-interviews, not when they again classified members of the royal family in not-so-elegant wordings, never. Only in 1999 the King vert indirectly remarked about a long crisis in his marriage with the Queen which has caused deep wounds. This however, so stated the King, was part of the private domain of the Queen and himself.
For five years Delphine has not reacted in this at all. In 2004/2005 she suddenly started to out herself in media, surprisingly (?) and co-incidentally (?) with the first exhibitions of her so-called artworks, trying to start a career as an artiste, which was not very succesful seeing the bankrupt state of her commerce.
He is just the man to whom her mother was married when she was born. From the limited information I know about him, he seems to be a decent man though and he did the honourable thing by his wife's child. But, in my opinion, that child does not owe him any particular obligation now. She seems to be rejecting his wealth, not claiming it, so she can hardly be labelled a gold-digger. Can't Boel leave his money to charity if he has no relatives or close friends? I doubt Delphine would mount any challenge to the Estate if he did that. 
