Posted on 08/18/2008 11:37:43 AM PDT by PercivalWalks
"I couldn't believe that our son has to pay child support to his abuser."
I've previously discussed cases where boys who have been statutorily raped by older women are forced to pay child support to their rapists. Here's a new one, from Ohio. From Boy's parents sue to get his baby from mom, 21 (Columbus Dispatch, 8/16/08):
LANCASTER, Ohio --- A Pickerington couple and their son are fighting for custody of a baby born to a Lancaster woman charged with having unlawful sex with the boy, who was 15 at the time of conception.Note also that the boy is allowed only seven hours a week of "visitation" with his son. He's really getting an early education on the joys of the family law system...A paternity test shows that the teen is the father of the baby born April 7 to Jane C. Crane, who was 19 when she became pregnant. Now, a judge has ordered him to pay $50 a month in child support and set visitation at seven hours a week.
Crane, meanwhile, faces criminal charges. A Fairfield County grand jury indicted her last month on two counts of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor, a fourth-degree felony. Conviction carries a maximum sentence of 18 months in prison and a requirement to register as a sex offender for 25 years.
Crane is living with the baby and her family in Lancaster.
The boy's parents say they can provide a better upbringing for the baby than Crane can. Her household includes her stepfather, David L. Jacobs, who was convicted of domestic violence last year for hitting, choking and pointing a gun at Crane's 17-year-old sister and was placed on two years' probation, court records show.
"We don't want to have our granddaughter abused by these people," the boy's father said. "We are trying to do the right thing.
"The child support was the icing on the cake. I couldn't believe that our son has to pay child support to his abuser."
Read the full article here.
[As an aside, I don't believe a 19-year-old having sex with a 15-year-old should be statutory rape. However, legally in this case it is statutory rape--just as it would be if it were a 35-year-old with a 15-year-old--so demanding that the victim pay child support should be out of the question.--GS]
Glenn Sacks, www.GlennSacks.com
[Note: If you or someone you love is faced with a divorce or needs help with child custody, child support, false accusations, Parental Alienation, or other family law or criminal law matters, ask Glenn for help by clicking here.]
Are you suggesting the boy was forced? I missed that part of the story.
There should be a law to stop this criminal from profiting from her crime. Oh wait, we already have such laws.
wow
How can she profit off $50 a month toward child support? How much do you think it costs to take care of a baby?
Wait just a minute. We haven’t been given the opportunity to determine Guilt or Innocence yet.
Regardless of whether or not the tables were turned, both people involved in the conception would still be held responsible for raising the baby. Had it been reversed, the girl would have gotten custody of the baby and would still have been responsible for raising the child. Just because the boy is the victim in this case doesn’t mean he can dodge his responsibilities any more than the girl would have been able to had she been the victim.
The big difference if the tables had been turned would be that the girl would have had the option of choosing an abortion, the boy had no such option available to him.
Does not matter. She committed a crime and the law does not allow her to profit from it. Not one penny. When she decided to rape an innocent child she forfeited her rights in my opinion.
I’m going to guess she’s guilty. She just sounds like the pimply-faced guilty type.
But seriously, this poor child is being used as a football. The custodial mother lives in a violent household. The non-custodial father’s family takes their anger against the mother out on the baby, by trying to avoid paying a mere $50 a month toward supporting that child. The “icing on the cake” that pushed them to go for custody was the child support. Not any abuse or neglect, but child support. That’s the reason they give for wanting custody. And the scary thing is, they might actually be the poor baby’s best hope. How sad.
The money is for the benefit of the baby, not the mother. The baby did not forfeit any rights.
Would somebody please show me the part where it says she forced him? This accusation without proof is getting old.
The consensus seems to be that it doesn’t cost anything to raise a baby, and she’s getting rich going around getting pregnant and collecting $50 a month which she spends on herself. I don’t know how many times she’s done this, but it must be a lot, based on the claims that she’s making a profit at it.
Your children are GOD’s way of paying you back for the times you were bad to your parents!! /sarc
I hear ya. $50/mo. won’t cover the cost of diapers.
Well, I don’t know about this. Yes the boy was underage, but the girl was only four years older than he was. They were a couple of teenagers who did something stupid, not an adult taking advantage of a child. Calling her a rapist is a little extreme unless there was something that happened that the news story didn’t mention like threatening him or something like that.
If the teenage boy was the older one, I would say that it is still the girl’s responsibility to carry the baby to term, so now that the teenage girl is the older one, it seems only fair to expect the boy to help support the child.
We don’t want to have our granddaughter abused by these people,” the boy’s father said. “We are trying to do the right thing.
“The child support was the icing on the cake. I couldn’t believe that our son has to pay child support to his abuser.”
Note also that the boy is allowed only seven hours a week of “visitation” with his son.......................................................................................................OK I am confused, was the child a boy aor a girl.
In my family, we call it “Mother’s curse.” “When you grow up, I hope you have a kid just like you.” (Funny thing, she never said that when we were being good.)
Not necessarily. In this day and age, you're not the only one who's confused.
Statutory rape(rape of a person unable to give legal consent due to age) is still rape. Force is not an issue or necessary for conviction.
Oh. Thanks.
How old was the little boy who couldn’t decide for himself whether or not he wanted to have sex?
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.