so you are saying that it is a fed law that says in oklahoma he has to pay regardless of if he is the real father or not...??...i will have to check but i do believe that the states differ on the law...in fla one can put his name on the birth cert. as the father. if he finds out after 2 years that he is not the father to bad so sad he pays child support, but if it is under 2 years and a dna test is done and he is not the father he doesn’t have to pay. i don’t believe that is a fed law but a state law. correct me if i am wrong and please do so by showing proof.
I cited
another source that says it was the 1996 welfare reforms that created this particular problem. I recall it pretty well, since I've been studying this stuff since 1989. I didn't specifically remember that 1996 federal reforms created this problem, but it seems quite right to me. That's about the time - or shortly thereafter - when states started changing their laws in this way.
The general background that people need to understand in order to get all this stuff is that the fed. has taken over marriage and family law. Constitutionally it's left to the states and to the people - so I agree with anyone who says it shouldn't be the way it is and understand when people are suprised at the very least. But it is so. All marriage and family law has been pulled into welfare law and is being written by Congress. States merely implement.
I've written several articles about how it's happened and why they're getting away with it. I'm known as an expert and writer on the subject - a little known fact - I served as an expert witness in the case that reclassified marriage and family law to allow the federal takeover. I was called in by the other side - which was fighting against the child support reforms.