Child support law leaves man a default dad

Tulsa World ^ | October 13, 2008 | Jarrel Wade

[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

[RogerFGay]

but too many parties like the status quo

It's the pork.

[An American In Dairyland]

Roger, I’ve read almost all of the links you’ve put up here in the past. You know what I’m talking about even if others here do not.

[RSmithOpt]

Yes, you are correct....Nifonging people is the new judicial pastime as well as legislating from the bench.

[RogerFGay]

Mr. Gay knows the reason for my posts.

I guess that's acknowledgement that I got it right. wtc911 is pushing the same-sex marriage agenda. The child support reform stuff was the the core of the war against fathers, which was the advance attack on marriage and family. The eventual result was reclassification of marriage and family law such that it produced a constitutional mandate for same-sex marriage. wtc911 doesn't want anyone to understand that. He's trying to avoid political pressure to fix the problem.

[An American In Dairyland]

Roger, you know that I know all about the history of CS reform including the bit about Reagan's part in it. I *already* agreed here with you that your comments about Reagan *are* true and valid.

It is just that I am no longer interested in Reagan's part in it. I've decided he merits a pass on that because it isn't "important." Reagan was a great president who saved the Republican Party and that is all I am focusing on WRT him now.

[RogerFGay]

You say such interesting things. How am I holding Reagan to a higher standard by stating facts about the history of legal reform and his part in it?

[An American In Dairyland]

Pork...family feuds...what’s the difference really? It is all corruption and equally wrong. But when we excuse one, we open the door to excusing *anything.*

[RobRoy]

Man, I’m glad I’m out of those particular woods. It is not lost on me that he said the four years AFTER prison were the worst in his life.

Maybe the easiest solution is to rob a liquor store and try to stay in prison until the child is 18. ;)

[RogerFGay]

I know you’ve read my links — I just couldn’t think of a better way to respond to your comment about how I’d like people to look me up on the Internet to find and read my work then by posting links. Maybe some of the other readers looking through each response post will find the links.

[RogerFGay]

Guys - seriously. Congress was very heavily involved in this stuff, as well as state governors and legislators. It’s a pork-barrel scheme. The courts are not guilty of legislating from the bench - only manipulating decisions to allow the unconstitutional scheme to continue.

[An American In Dairyland]

Not here, Roger. You *know* who I’m comparing Reagan to in this reference. You want to discuss it further, contact me via email. If not, I’m equally fine with that, too.

[RobRoy]

I’d move to a certain central american nation...

If I had it to do over again, I would never have paid child support. Not a dime. But my children would have been free to come live with me and then I would have fully supported them as members of my family living under my roof.

‘Course, that is because my own children were taken from me, against my will and without cause. And I STILL had to buy anything they had that was nice since my ex was using the $3,400 a month I was paying to pad her own retirement.

[RogerFGay]

Pork...family feuds...what’s the difference really? It is all corruption and equally wrong. But when we excuse one, we open the door to excusing *anything.*

The difference is government power.

[Doohickey]

"If you got me on default, you should still have to prove that I'm the father," he said.

You want justice? Ridiculous. You'll get none of that. You're just an ambulatory wallet to the family courts.

[RogerFGay]

Reagan was a great president who saved the Republican Party

The Republican Party is looking more dead by the minute. This is the Reagan legacy catching up with them. You can't deny it has nothing to do with it, as every one of them in the primaries tried to emulate him, and even McCain had to say his name a couple of times in the debates and elsewhere. They're continuing his legacy - i.e. "Ronald Reagan's Mistake" - and they're paying the price for it.

[An American In Dairyland]

I know you’ve read my links — I just couldn’t think of a better way to respond to your comment about how I’d like people to look me up on the Internet to find and read my work then by posting links. Maybe some of the other readers looking through each response post will find the links.

I'm fine with you using my posts as a springboard to enlightening other people. You have written many good and accurate articles on the topic and people SHOULD get steered to them to educate themselves on these topics.

However, I have learned things that I'd have been happier not knowing from you. Now I cannot just walk blindly in lockstep with every thing you put up here especially in regards to your personal *feelings* about matters. I know you know what I mean.

[An American In Dairyland]

The difference is government power.

Oh, Lord, the sweet irony! Do you even realize what you just said???

[Tammy8]

It is really past time to use a little common sense in these cases. If the man is proven to not be the father, he should be totally off the hook for child support.

At this point, the only way this will be fixed is to lobby to change the law in the states that do child support this way. These officials and courts will never back down on this unless a law forces them to.

[An American In Dairyland]

Roger, you know WHO I am comparing Reagan here to.

[RogerFGay]

Now I cannot just walk blindly in lockstep with every thing you put up here especially in regards to your personal *feelings* about matters. I know you know what I mean.

Yep ... like lambs to the slaughter we walk every election year. But now we know too much and can't just get swept up by the intentionally manipulative emotional arguments and dive off the cliff with the others.