Posted on 10/14/2008 4:39:29 AM PDT by RogerFGay
Brande Samuels, 29, shows some
of the child support documents from
the Oklahoma Department of Human
Services. Samuels has been forced by
the state to pay child support for a
child but DNA tests show he is not the
father. SHERRY BROWN /
Tulsa World Friday
He promised himself and his family that when he left his prison cell, he would work hard to build a stable and positive life. After two years in prison, he was released early on good behavior and worked for less than minimum wage while he trained to become a welder. But that's when he first got notice from the Oklahoma Department of Human Services' Child Support Enforcement Division that he owed child support, he said.
Now, Samuels owes about $13,000 in back child support, he lives with his ailing grandfather and DHS seizes portions of his wages every month. "The last four years have been the worst in my life," Samuels said about life since leaving prison in 2004. "I went into so much debt." Samuels said under other circumstances he would take full responsibility for the child as a father should.
But he is not the father.
0.00 percent chance
Samuels was aware of the possibility that he might be the father during the pregnancy, he said. But the mother had been in another relationship at the same time.
"She wouldn't even allow me to sign the birth certificate," he said.
Two months later, the mother — Nadia Smith — put his name down as the father when she filed for child support, which Samuels wouldn't learn about until after his Oklahoma prison sentence, he said.
"They make (the mother) give up a name for the potential father. If she doesn't give up a name, then she can't get any assistance," Samuels said about the process to receive child support.
Jeff Wagner, spokesman for DHS, said when a mother is opening a child support case, she names the alleged father and provides "a great deal of information" in the Mother's Affidavit of Paternity.
In 2004, when Samuels left prison and learned of his obligation to DHS, case workers told Samuels if he wanted to fight the original order and get a hearing, he needed a lawyer, he said.
"I just want to be heard," he said. "The court was made for justice. It was made to help make the right decision."
Samuels did not have enough money to pay a lawyer, and no one would take his case for free, so in 2006, he approached Neighbor for Neighbor, a Tulsa nonprofit organization. They helped him prepare papers to require the mother to provide the child for a DNA test.
He found out then that the mother had left the state and had to be tracked down. She had left Oklahoma for Texas, Texas for Iowa, and then Iowa for Mississippi between 2004 and 2007, he said.
Neighbor for Neighbor helped Samuels track her through the courts and filed court papers seeking a DNA test from the child in March 2007, according to court records.
Two months later, Samuels received DNA evidence that the child support had been based on a false assumption. He was not the father — 0.00 percent chance.
"I was hurt. I was actually hurt because they put me through all this stuff without the child even being mine," he said.
After his three years of work, he believed he would be forgiven all his debt for the child, he said.
But it wasn't forgiven, and according to Oklahoma law, it won't be forgiven.
Default fatherhood
In child support cases, the burden of proof is on the alleged father — the accused — according to Oklahoma statutes.
An alleged father must appear at a child support hearing to request a paternity test. If he does not appear, he is legally designated as the father and child support is established in most cases.
Once designated as the father, that person is financially responsible for the child until he or she is 18 or adopted with a few stipulations for petitions which may vacate the original order, according to Oklahoma statutes.
DHS records show that Samuels was served papers to appear for his child support hearing in 2001, but Samuels said he was working in Texas at the time and could not have received the notice.
Wagner said by Oklahoma law someone can be legally served if the subpoena is put into the hands of someone 15 or older who lives at the same residence as the person.
But Samuels said the documents never touched his hands.
Regardless of the outcome of the DNA test, which Samuels spent three years trying to get, it was already too late.
Samuels was ruled the default father in 2001, and legally, DNA has no bearing.
"If you got me on default, you should still have to prove that I'm the father," he said.
This is the second recent story in the media of a default father being forced to pay child support in a bureaucratic nightmare with DHS.
The first, reported by The Oklahoman, was about Micheal Thomas of Tulsa, who had shown that he had never even met the mother and that he had DNA evidence that showed he wasn't the father. Still, he became a default father after missing his initial court hearing.
DHS does not keep statistics on the number of established fathers or default fathers who are not genetically related to the child they are responsible for, Wagner said.
In the eyes of the law and DHS, once paternity is established, there is no difference.
DHS officials would not comment on whether any changes have been made in establishing paternity since the Micheal Thomas case was reported.
Paternity figures
Between April 1, 2007, and March 31, the state Department of Human Services established paternity of 20,452 children in Oklahoma of those cases, 5,208 were forced through court order, according to DHS Child Support Enforcement Division records.
In the same time period, there were 3,127 paternity tests conducted in DHS cases. Of those, 781 of the alleged fathers were found not to be the genetic father and were released from the case.
Jarrel Wade 581-8310
jarrel.wade@tulsaworld.com
It will remain impoosible to "get the people with the power" to change the system when people like you support politicians who not only see no problem with the status quo, but have in fact USED this system for their own personal benefit. It is up to the electorate to be *discriminating* in who the Republican party puts up as candidates for high office. But that ain't happening here or anywhere else and especially amongst men who have already been victimized by this system. There's the irony I keep mentioning.
And there are still many people who do not realize that the fed. has taken over marriage and family law - so, they don’t really know that needs to be fixed. There’s also a tendency to think the problem needs to be addressed at state level - which is futile at this point. States are no longer in charge of marriage and family law.
Please share your understanding of how to get out of it rather than just hinting that you have a plan.
Mama’s baby, Daddy’s maybe. ;0(
The problem needs to be fixed all over the place but the ONE place the average Joe Sixpack can change things is in the election booth. First they need to know the whole truth about the candidates (like Reagan for example in the past) Republicans keep putting up. The problem here is folks just blindly vote Republican out of fear rather than knowledge.
Officially you have not endorsed anyone but your words have been noted.
“Words have meaning.” ~Rush Limbaugh
Yes to that. And as you know, I do not believe that McCain has any chance of victory without stronger support from men, and he’s not going to get it unless he’s willing to give them their civil rights back.
My words have not endorsed anyone.
You've already broken that promise. You HAVE supported a candidate that doesn't openly promise to fight for effective policy changes for restoring the institution of the family and individual rights but you *told* me personally that you don't care that this candidate has actually USED the broken system for her own personal gain. Gotta run now but I'll be back.
You are playing with words, here. I can post numerous links that show what you said without “literally” endorsing the candidate in question and you know it.
I’m not talking about McCain and you know that, too.
I haven’t endorsed anyone. I’m not supporting any candidate. Many many people support candidates by critisizing their opponents. Please don’t tell me that I’m not allowed to critisize. I haven’t suggested to anyone that they should vote for any candidate. I have not said that any candidate meets my criteria ....
how about this one...if a man and woman aren’t married but live together and have a child together, both parents are on birth cert. but the state does not recognize nor give parental rights to the father solely because they were not married at the time of birth.
now my question is this. a man and woman are married and a child is born. both the man and woman are on the birth cert. the man is assumed to be the father so he has all parental rights.
all i am asking is in the 2nd case why should it be assumed he is the father? but in the first case when both man and woman acknowledge they are the parents the man is not assumed to be the father by law.
Again, I gotta run but I’ll be back.
Is Brande Samuels a deadbeat dad? Is he scum?
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.