Posted on 08/19/2014 2:02:41 PM PDT by nickcarraway
I agree the article wasn’t very clear.
I have no knowledge about British paternity suits, but it is probably similar to what we have here.
I prosecuted child support cases in northeastern North Carolina for about 25 years. The general idea is that when a child receives what used to be called AFDC (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) that kid assigned his rights with respect to child support against his father to the state who was paying the AFDC to the extent of the AFDC payments.
I sued alleged fathers to establish paternity and for child support. It is amazing how many men who were sued never lifted a finger to contest the proceeding. In most states, when you get sued in civil court and if you do not answer the complaint against you in a timely fashion, the allegations in the complaint are considered to be admitted.
Our statistics were that if a man asked for paternity testing (a blood test until somewhere around 1990 and genetic testing after that) they were excluded as potential fathers about 15% to 25% of the time. We even went so far as to send a note with the complaint that the alleged fathers were entitled to first blood and later genetic testing if they wanted it and that if the court found them to be the father it would be very difficult to get such testing later.
When men actually appeared in court (usually without filing any response to the complaint) we would tell them again that they had the right to have testing done. About half the time these men asked for the testing when they showed up in court and they got tested.
My guess is that this guy should lose in his effort to recoup his money. He almost certainly had a chance to contest paternity. He did not contest it. Probably the money went to reimburse the taxpayers for what they had paid to fund his kid. With minimal effort this guy could have had the paternity issue determined early on. Had he been shown not to be the father, the government could have chased the real father. It is quite likely that the biological father is largely broke or maybe dead. Why should taxpayers have to pay for the screw up this guy made by not asking for testing years ago?
If this guy was worth a damn, he would have take some part in his kid’s life once he was adjudicated to be her father. Apparently he did nothing. To hell with him.
“I must respectfully differ. That a father should support his offspring is a foundational principle of civilization is unquestioned”
The children of a man’s wife are his children.
He provides for the family.
Whether he divorces due to infidelity is a separate issue.
A father is the man who raises a child, no matter whom the biological progenitor is.
A man who forsakes a child he has raised as his own in marriage because he finds out the child was not his, biologically, is punishing the child for the failures of he and his wife and their marriage.
This case is weird because of our present society.
Men are sitting ducks for the shameless frauds that predatory women perpetrate on them. No wonder so many men are wary of any entanglements.
Did you read the article. He did wear a condom and he did dispute it from day one and the govt garnished his wages.
I don’t blame him for being pissed. They garnished his wages with no proof. WTF.
But I do agree with those here saying you should not put yourself in these situations.
Women are losing respect. I wonder why?
“I sued alleged fathers to establish paternity and for child support. It is amazing how many men who were sued never lifted a finger to contest the proceeding. In most states, when you get sued in civil court and if you do not answer the complaint against you in a timely fashion, the allegations in the complaint are considered to be admitted.”
Here in Kalifornia its very typical that the State relies on the mother to provide an address which, surprise, is not actually his address (they don’t serve in person but simply mail the summons). So he doesn’t appear and gets tagged for 18+ years of child support with no appeal. The system is rigged and I would not be surprised to find out that’s what happened to this guy as once you’re tagged the system makes sure you pay and pay and pay with no real recourse in the courts.
I read it and must’ve missed that part.
Guys really should get a DNA test if they are not married to the baby mama. I have seen a few relatives endure this same situations.
Agreed.
it isn’t just. sorry. not when the guy is not thefather it isnt. besides hedid prove it. if you won’t accept dna for innocence you better not let the state accept’it for guilt, either.
this is another branch of the war on men by feminist theory. you prove 100% you’re not the dad, and the state still refuses to correct the wrong committed. he couldn,t have gotten the tests earlier b/c the stte gave him no rights and he couldn’t legally have had her tested.
this isn’t right and i don’t care what gender you are, if dna clears you of something you ought to be made right as best as possible.
This case, is as I said, unusual.
Not true in Arkansas, unless there is a divorce decree stating you are the father.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.