Posted on 03/04/2008 9:05:13 AM PST by MotleyGirl70
Parents owe $14,460 in case of mistaken paternity, judge says
Justice was also shortchanged, the judge said, because Mr. Samuels had been paying child support all of those years.
Last month, Judge Roper ruled that Jamie Hope, the child's mother, and Oba Wallace, the child's biological father, would have to repay Mr. Samuels $14,460 in child support he had paid since 1997.
Such an order is unusual, but not unique.
"We have seen it happen before," said Sandra Jarrett of the state's Child Support Recovery Unit.
Usually there is no intent to defraud, Ms. Jarrett said. Mothers who have had relationships with more than one man might not know who the biological father is without a DNA test.
Ms. Jarrett estimated 40 percent to 45 percent of their new cases are filed by a custodial parent who never married, and a DNA test is requested to establish paternity.
Child Support Services helps about 30,000 families in Richmond, Columbia and Burke counties. Across Georgia, 500,000 families are assisted, Ms. Jarrett said.
In Mr. Samuels' case, it began April 22, 1997, when Ms. Hope opened a Child Support Services case that named Mr. Samuels the father of her child.
Mr. Samuels said he never had any reason to doubt the child was his. He signed the birth certificate, and he consented to an order to pay child support.
Mr. Wallace told the judge at a hearing last summer that he heard from different people that the child looked like him. The child called him daddy when she saw him in town, Mr. Wallace said.
Mr. Wallace said he told Ms. Hope he would take care of the child financially if he was the biological father. They decided to get a DNA test last summer, Mr. Wallace said.
The DNA test proved Mr. Wallace was the biological father, and he filed a court petition to legally establish paternity. The case was assigned to Judge Roper, who had no problem with signing the order that established legal paternity. But he said he was troubled by the position in which it left Mr. Samuels.
The judge questioned Mr. Wallace and Ms. Hope about when they first suspected Mr. Wallace was the biological father. Both eventually admitted it was around the time the child was 2.
"I've never heard (of) this gentleman until this year, and I never knew that she was seeing anyone else," Mr. Samuels told the judge last summer.
Ms. Hope told the judge she wanted a paternity test in 1997 when the baby was born but that Mr. Samuels declined. He denied that.
"You swore that he was the father when you took out a child support action," Judge Roper told Ms. Hope. He said he considered that action fraudulent and ordered Ms. Hope to repay Mr. Samuels the $14,460 he had paid in child support payments.
In February, Judge Roper ruled Mr. Wallace was liable to Mr. Samuels for the back child support, too. Judge Roper said in explaining his ruling that once paternity is established, a father can be required to pay back support to the time of birth. Since Mr. Wallace's paternity was established, he was responsible for the child support since the birth in 1997, and responsible for repaying Mr. Samuels.
Ms. Jarrett said that when a child support case is opened, the man identified as a child's father can request a DNA test. If the test comes back negative, the case against that man is closed. If it is positive, then paternity is established and Child Support Services works to obtain a court order for child support.
A man can also petition the court directly to request a legal determination of paternity, which is what Mr. Wallace did.
Paternity establishes who is responsible for the financial support of a child. If a father also desires visitation rights, he must legitimize the child, too, Judge Roper said. Although Child Support Services cannot help with visitation issues, the office can refer parents to mediation.
Child Support Services will help fathers with employment issues. It operates the Georgia Fatherhood Program to provide job counseling, training, educational assistance, placement assistance and other services. In Georgia, 25 percent of children have a case with the Child Support Services, according to the state Department of Human Resources.
Judge David Roper said he felt badly for Kenneth Samuels when he learned the child he had fathered for 11 years wasn't his.
Good on ya judge.
$14,000 over 11 years
$106.06 per month
I did the math because I was curious.
That seems odd.
Damn. A judge that gives a hoot about the law, and justice. A rarity these days.
This happened in a Georgia court? This reversal is truly a miracle of God. Now if we could only get the mother jailed for fraud. Until then, if she is late on a payment, a warrant for her arrest should be issued just as easily as it was for the plaintiff all those years.
Poor kid. Too bad he has to be involved with all these skumbags.
Wha?
That’s what happens when you boink the same chick that everyone else is boinking.
unfortunatly every state is different.
In some states child support only starts once paternaty is established and support is first ordered.
Of course california has serious paternity fraud issues.
I suspect this is unusual. I remember reading about a judge’s order of child support when it was KNOWN from the start that the child was not that of the ex-husband who was forced to pay.
But I don’t know which of these two sorts of decision is more prevalent.
“My baby’s daddy” ping.
Yes, it’s good BUT I don’t think the outcome would have been the same if not for the fact of another man coming forward to claim paternity and take responsibility. The state’s interest is to have somebody - anybody - on the hook for support of the child rather than have to be the one to provide it. If not for the other guy coming forward, the state likely would have forced the other guy to keep paying, even if he proved he wasn’t the biological father. JMO.
> That’s what happens when you boink the same chick that everyone else is boinking.
Chick? Don’t you mean “Cow”.
The state’s interest is to have somebody - anybody - on the hook for support of the child rather than have to be the one to provide it.
::::::
Exactly. A government for and by the government....
"We have seen it happen before," said Sandra Jarrett of the state's Child Support Recovery Unit.
Usually there is no intent to defraud, Ms. Jarrett said. Mothers who have had relationships with more than one man might not know who the biological father is without a DNA test.
We have seen it happen before?
Usually there is not intent to defraud?
Any guy in this situation that is forced to pay without a paternity test is being defrauded. He is being made to pay without due process. Courts are a party to it if they don't foce the test.
How many times have they seen this before? Once? Twice?
I agree 110%! A premise on one of my papers in college. That if a woman has the right to terminate her motherhood and by de facto his fatherhood then a man should have the same choice as to whether or not he provide support for his offspring. I definitly don’t condone abortion at all but it really worked up all those females in my class to think that they might have to think about exercising their choice or not receiving a payment for their “services” until the aftermath was 18 years old. “I ain’t sayin she a gold digga, but she ain’t messin with no broke fellas!” Kanye West.
“Usually there is no intent to defraud, Ms. Jarrett said. Mothers who have had relationships with more than one man might not know who the biological father is without a DNA test.”
My son is in this position. He has asked for a DNA test several times but has been told to get lost. State is Utah. They don’t care, just want somebody to pay just as long as it is not the state.
Bookmarking for when I get home from work.
That’s my take as well. I’ll add that most men I know would be very happy to have their children without having to spend $50k to get them, and could care less if the mother provided a dimes worth of support.
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.