It wasn't his child, but court says he must pay

Miami Herald ^ | January 5, 2006 | Sara Olkon

[moehoward]

"If you accept a child at birth, without question, it's the same as adoption. What, are you going to argue that parents that adopt kids should be able to 'divorce' their kids if they divorce their spouse as well? Rediculous, for obvious reasons. This is no different.

Yes it is. An adoption is entered into knowingly. This woman defrauded this man plain and simple. If the actual father is aware of it, he too is complicit.

[moehoward]

"This is nothing new."

No it's not. But the motives behind it certainly have changed. Follow the money. Child welfare agencies, Lawyers, courts............

[dennisw]

Thanks for the good transcript.

[AntiGuv]

And by the way, the courts would be far more bogged down by a system where deceived fathers (a) paid child support to their adulterous ex-wives; then (b) sued their ex-wives adulterous partner for compensation. Why on earth is that better or less burdensome on the courts than simply reassigning paternity to the actual father?

[Beagle8U]

"If you accept a child at birth, without question, it's the same as adoption. What, are you going to argue that parents that adopt kids should be able to 'divorce' their kids if they divorce their spouse as well? Rediculous, for obvious reasons. This is no different."

I think you are painfully wrong, and I proved that in court when DNA testing was first being used in court.

I married a woman that had a bastard child nearly 2 years old before I ever met the mother.

Being an nice guy that thought the child should have a last name before she started school, I (foolishly) signed a paper that my x-wife brought home that would claim parentage and change the child's last name.

I don't think it was even legal, but somehow she had it registered and the name and birth certificate was changed.

In a divorce about 2 years later, child support was demanded and after legal battles the tests were done and the judge said he hated the fact that legally he couldn't force me to pay one dime in support.

Even though the mother lied and claimed it was my child, and the records showed it was mine.

Now when the mother and her lawyer found out that I planed to order DNA tests, they withdrew their claim for support, but the stinking liberal judge refused because he still wanted to force me to pay and said as much in open court.

[moehoward]

", but he accepted responsibility for it by calling it his own at birth. He's now accepted responsibility for the kid. "

Yes. While duped during the commission of fraud, under the mistaken assumption it was his child, he accepted responsibility.

Your argument will on hold water IF he knew it was not his in the beginning.

[HamiltonJay]

Paternity was not contested, nor even in this situation is the act of paternity being argued to be relinquished.. this guy just doesn't want to give the money to his ex wife, he hasn't gone before the court to ask that all his parental rights be terminated now has he?

You are mixing apples and oranges.

[dennisw]

Just be clear- you were not forced to pay despite the judge?

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Somebody's lying.

[moehoward]

"So, a man has sex with a woman who says she's on the pill but isn't. I take it you would say he's not reponsible for any kid that might be created? Why not? He was lied to. "

Another flawed comparison. More accurately, she lies about the pill AND gets impregnated by a different man, THEN lies (again) to her husband by telling him it's his.

[Beagle8U]

"Your argument will on hold water IF he knew it was not his in the beginning"


It still don't hold water.

See post #225

[AntiGuv]

Unless I am seriously misreading something (I'll admit it's conceivable) he is in fact requesting that his parental rights be terminated, although he is offering to nonetheless maintain some degree of financial support for the child and a relationship (assuming the mother permits) despite the fact that he would then not be obligated to do anything at all.

It amazes me that in your view his apparent willingness to continue providing for the child despite being cuckolded and defrauded should be held against him!

[Beagle8U]

No Sir, I didn't have to pay one dime, and that really pissed that judge off.

[AntiGuv]

I just wanted to mention that the laws do vary considerably from state to state, and so what holds in yours (Michigan?) does not necessarily apply to Florida.

However, you definitely make the point that the blanket statement you were responding to is false.

[dennisw]

Good for you! As it should be!

[jamaly]

If the child is conceived through artificial insemination via a sperm donor, the husband pays child support and has parental rights whether the mother wants him to or not.

[AntiGuv]

You're very welcome!

[Beagle8U]

"Good for you! As it should be!"

Yes it was justice, but I sure as hell didn't feel very good that the child was put through that by her mother just trying to score some cash.

The child could have been told later if life when she would have had better understanding of the situation.

At that time they needed about a half pint of blood from every party involved.

[GreenOgre]

I'm in a similiar situation. I have two boys with my ex-wife and then one from one of her boyfriends. If I fought paying child support for the youngest I would get visitation yanked. It would be traumatic for all three. Of course my vicious whXXe of an ex would manipulate the boys just a little more. Plus it would probably break up the family of the father who is married with two kids. I'm stuck sucking it up for someone else for three years plus another fourteen to come.

New tagline possibility. Prostitution, it's cheaper than marriage.

[dennisw]

As to some of the fine freeper ladies who have replied to you -


http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:OfVoxDjwOO4J:web.utk.edu/~unistudy/values/ethics98/mcgrory.htm+jack+nicholson+woman+man+all+accountability&hl=en
We hear the word, "accountability," more times than we see it in operation. This is simply a fact of modern life. In the movie, "As Good As It Gets," there is a defining moment in which a young woman gushes at Jack Nicholson's character, Melvin, telling him how much she admires his work, and asking how he is able to portray women so expertly. He insinuates himself around this response: "I think of a man. And then I take away reason and accountability." What Nicholson's character is defining here is not simply his own obsessive ego but a world of his construction in which half the population is without any responsibility to be accountable for its deeds, namely the female half.