Posted on 07/13/2007 6:00:54 AM PDT by GeorgiaDawg32
FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida (CNN) -- Francisco Rodriguez owes more than $10,000 in back child support payments in a paternity case involving a 15-year-old girl who, according to DNA results and the girl's mother, is not his daughter.
Francisco Rodriguez is fighting for leniency in his paternity case. "It's not right. I'm not the father, " he said.
Rodriguez, who is married with two daughters and a son from his wife's previous marriage, is fighting for leniency. "It's not right. I'm not the father, " he said at a recent court hearing.
He says he knew nothing about the other girl until paperwork showed up about four years ago saying he was the father.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
“Folks, “It Takes a Village...””
Right . . . the judge should levy child support on the “village” . . . which is really the ultimate effect of the decision to become a single mother by these amoral women. And yes, the amoral dipstick sperm contributors (I won’t call them men or fathers) bear responsiblity, too.
The best interest of the child is justice between the parents.
Always.
Any order for child support for a child that he is not the father of is a travesty of justice...but hey...how long has it been since our legal system has actually put the just in JUSTice?
The tragic thing is - if the girl’s biological father shows up and wants to assume the role of “daddy”, and the mother goes along with it, there is very little your friend can probably do if it goes to court.
The girl's mother evidently has said that Rodriguez should not be paying child support. She could--and should--return the money to him.
A man should NEVER be required to pay child support involuntarily for a child whom he did not father. In a case (and there have been many) in which a child's mother knowningly and fraudulently causes a man to think that he is the child's father and thus fraudulently extorts child support payments from him, the woman should be subject to civil suit--by the man, his wife, and his children--for recovery of all child support payments paid, with interest, and for punative damages.
That's a no-brainer--that is for anyone who values justice.
This is another no-brainer.
Kid’s not mine, either.
What do I owe?
I want to see the judgement reversed, recoup of all legal fees, and a judgement rendered for this aggrieved non-father to the tune of 500,000.00.
Depends.
Whatchya got?
Fortunately the girl is 19 now. I think he’s pretty safe anyway, sounded like the ex had several friends during the marriage, the dad of the girl, probably doesn’t have and will never have a clue he has a child. Sad perhaps for him if he knew.
Then again, it could be my friends child after all, sometimes they don’t take dad’s characteristics. All the confusion and wonder just adds to the case of how important it is to be faithful in a marriage. I imagine he’ll go to his death bed never knowing if the child is actually his.
The terms ‘bastard’ and ‘slut’ were part of our language long before ‘single parent’ was made the PCSpeak mandated substitute for ‘slut’.
PS A child of a ‘single parent’ is still a ‘bastard’ regardless of what anyone says.
Yes, those terms are both pejorative and derogatory - but accurate. Most important of all, they were effective at reducing the number of bastards.
As soon as I got divorced I felt I was being treated as a criminal complete with probation.
With everything I do and every move I make, I have to register with the State. My entire financial life is in the hands of the State.
The way it works is, they take as much from my paycheck as they want to pay themselves and my wife and I get to keep whatever residual is left over.
My wife and daughters best interest is constantly before the court whereas my interests and well being is literally irrelevant. And could not mean this in a stronger sense.
I am the villain, the criminal, the guilty party; they are the victims. I must be made to pay no matter what.
“And just think of what this is doing to the girl...”
How about what the mother did to the girl instead. The entire blame lies on her for the fraud she has perpetrated.
Everytime they run these articles, they always try to paint the one who was conned as this selfish guy who is punishing the kids. I can understand its an emotionally complicated thing. But how come its always, “the mother declined to be interviewed.......” We know exactly why she did. Because she’s a fraud and dragged her children into this as well. I’m sure if these men were not getting screwed over in courts, many more would be open to being friends with these children and being involved in their lives.
I have a best friend who has been involved in a very similar set of circumstances. Finding out after a few years of paying child support that the kid isn’t his and the mother picked him to claim he was the father because he made a decent living. Surprise, surprise, the courts are going after him, not the biological father to financially support this child.
How come we never hear of the courts going after the real fathers to pay the child support? Because the biased family courts aren’t interested in that. All they care about is finding some male who was dumb enough to work hard and make something of themselves to foot the bill for someone elses fraud and bad decisions.
Then take the list and do DNA on all the men. She can go on The Maury Povich Show have it done for free. Some of the me would get to the “I’m-not-your-baby’s-Daddy dance, but not all of them.
far as I’m concerned, all it takes is some obscure allegation from the woman and the man is immediately, completely and totally guilty of that allegation (in this case a child which isn’t his) and must prove innocence. On top of that, he must be made to pay the ex-wife support/alimony, with no hope of recovering his money when and if the obscure allegations are proven false. On top of that, he’s out whatever legal fees he had to pay to get out of the mess, while ex-wifey walks away scott free, loading her guns for the next round..
the system is loaded against the male..
That, and also to allow the appeal of old cases where there's a claim of no paternity (like this one), with an AUTOMATIC revocation of the child support order and restitution to the "former" father. Anything else is a horribly monstrous injustice.
Me, I'd give away my assets to family or friends, wait about 90 days and then refuse to work and go on welfare. Let's see them collect from that.
Typical democrat party hack judges at work. In that epi-center of juck justice: Florida.
Ferociously anti-male gross miscarraiges of justice ensue.
I know, but it was in the article, a different man. He said he “had to” cut the child off. I say “then you didn’t love her to begin with!!!!!”
I feel for you. Fortunately, I have not gone through a divorce. More my wife’s doing than mine. It helps to get the right woman.
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.