Posted on 08/24/2009 6:47:55 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
* Man paid prostitute for sex
* She gave birth to his baby
* He is refusing to pay child support
A MAN who paid a woman for sex is resisting child support requests after the prostitute had his baby.
The married Melbourne man argues the child is potentially a breach of the Trade Practices Act.
He told a federal magistrate he shouldn't have to pay for the inadvertent offspring given the circumstances of the conception, the Herald Sun reports.
The accidental dad - who can be referred to only by the pseudonym Mr Lilley - told magistrate Grant Riethmuller he'd had "a consumer transaction" with the child's mother.
Mr Lilley argued an implied term of the "contract" between clients and sex workers was that women would take measures to avoid pregnancy.
Mr Lilley told the court he was not disputing paternity.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...
If I was his wife, he wouldn’t have to worry abut any more sexual encounters with other women, paid or not, because he’d be missing the equipment!!
Having unprotected sex with a woman who makes a living having sex with whom ever has the money & bringing what ever diseases he picked up home. Yeah, if I was the wife, I’d be beyond angry!!
Did you know that anyone who has custody or guardianship of an individual who is getting any kind of support payment has the power to decide how to spend the money with no guidelines given (i.e. it must be used directly for the guarded individual's welfare)? Even an adult unrelated to a child who has guardianship for that child has that right. I was amazed that there are no guidelines or requirements on how the money is spent.
(Caveat: I'm not sure that is true in every state, but from what I was reading, it appears to be the case in most states.)
Back in the 1980s my Mom had to keep a log of the SS money for my underage sister and report to a federal social worker on how it was spent. They got rid of all that. You can imagine how fraud must have increased.
Child support with no fault divorce turned into a privatized welfare for middle class that encouraged single Mom hood, now considered hero's by compassionate conservatives like GWB (an reelection strategy.)
The part that is frightening is the secret family courts that throw men in jail with no trial for not paying their girlfriends lawyer fees. I rile up freepers here by comparing them with Islamic justice.
That legalizing vices results in the most happiness for all.
He probably blew any chance of custody when he admitted he wasn’t disputing paternity, but nevertheless doesn’t want to support the child.
Because "child support" is ordered literally (well at least theoretically) to support the child's needs. Often times Mama gets way more than what she spends on the child. The rest is used to support HER, and/or her boyfriend. Which is taking funds for one purpose and spending them on another.
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.