Man Sues After Finding Girl Not His Daughter

Yahoo News ^ | 11/01/02

[Libloather]

Man Sues After Finding Girl Not His Daughter
Fri Nov 1,10:43 AM ET

MELBOURNE (Reuters) - An Australian man is suing his former partner to recover more than $10,000 he spent on a little girl, for things such as presents, zoo trips and meals, after discovering she was not his daughter, a newspaper said on Friday.

"I want it all back -- every cent for every toy, every blanket, every bit of food," the man, who can't be identified for legal reasons, said.

"I wouldn't have spent all that money had I known five years ago she wasn't my kid," he was quoted saying by the Herald-Sun.

The claims include take-away McDonald's food over five years, four visits to an amusement park, three Barbie dolls, a Pooh Bear play tent, a day of skating, and child support payments.

The Herald-Sun said the man took the action after DNA tests found the girl was not his daughter.

The girl's mother said she was willing to repay the child support payments but that she should not have to pay back anything else.

"She had a good time with him that's the main thing," she was quoted as saying. "I don't think he should carry on too much about it. He should treat it like doing something nice with a friend."

[Jaidyn]

I agree but doubt the real father knows. Perhaps she didn't like him or he didn't have as much money. It is good to protect the children but since women know that we (and the courts) will rule in favor of the children, they tend to use the situation to further themselves rather than do what is right for the kids. My kids came first, and though I would never allow myself to enter into this type situation, I would be upfront with them no matter what. In this day and age is is foolish to be otherwise. I'm surprised not more of these kids ended up marrying half-siblings since having children without both parents available is rampant.

[adx]

There should be better research about vasectomy reversals for those wishing to have children, but these days a vasectomy (and a refusal to marry) can be a man's best friend.

IIRC, there was an article toward the beginning of the year here on FR about a male version of The Pill that's undergoing clinical trials. Supposedly it could hit the market in the next few years. How much you wanna bet that every single male making more than minimum wage will be on it when it becomes available?

[Mark17]

She could sue him to be paid for all the sex they had.

LOL, but that would make her a....oh never mind.

[Mamzelle]

You miss my point. The child is INNOCENT. The child is very impressionable and had a long standing relationship with the "father." He now casts her aside without any feeling.)))

Oh, but it's worse than abandonment. No one expects him to pay further child support, but this case involves a public gesture (civil suit) of contempt and hate toward the child herself. "Gimme back them dolls and teddy bears. You're worthless, and never deserved them."

All so the Prideful Male can enact his spite.

Sheesh! And this is a conservative forum! My, I have had my own delusions taken from me.

[BuddhaBoy]

You make perfect sense.

Unfortunetly, it will be ignored because of the overwhelming desire for some here to punish single men for daring to have sex.

That is the real issue here. There are people who think a man should pay for the act. Pay for LIFE, for the act of sex.

They like to appoint themselves as God's own judge and jury, and suggest that anything sinful in their eyes is punishable regardless of the circumstances.

Kinda reminds me of the Taliban.

[fooman]

Why is no one on this thread talking about the REAL FATHER?

He should step up and WANT to support the child. Thats the real harm. THE BIG LIE WILL NOT HELP THE CHILD! It will only hurt more in the long run.

But what will help over the long run is deterance from this happening by exposing these cases.

The feminists have changed the rules and calculations for men, whether good women and men (the are many of this forum) like it or not.

The rules are :

1) Shack and shag. NEVER get married.
2) Sleep around! Wait to you get a live one then pay up.
3) Women get equal pay. Make 'em pay half.
4) Chivalry is dead, unless you can catch a bambi in a weak moment for the one night stand.


Paganism is now the godless rule, as kindness from our judeo-christian heritage has been removed.

[Mamzelle]

Hmmm. I might like a piece of that bet. It's highly unlikely to be popular. I might even sell the stock short. Boys take their pleasure and cry about consequences later. If they had the wisdom of preparedness, they'd know which women to leave alone.

[Timm]

I suppose it remains fruitless to point out that this child did nothing wrong, and faces quite a painful, life-altering rejection that this public battle will only make worse.

If the man was deceived into paying support then it ought to remain fruitless to point out the support aided the child, and even that the child will be emotionally harmed when his mother's fraud is revealed.

A single parent is not entitled to keep the fruits of a burglarly because she used the proceeds to buy things for her kid, nor is she protected from civil suit by the victims because the emotional trauma of her being labeled a thief is too great for the children.

I don't see any "balancing" in the cases you describe either. "Real men" should accept that they can be deceived by women into raising kids that are not theirs, all because the women let them into their "magic box"? Give me a break.

[BuddhaBoy]

Oh, we Prideful males.......

Harsh as it may seem, the kid DIDNT deserve the toys from HIM. Get over it.

[doug from upland]

I totally agree. The child considers him her father, albeit a stepfather. She has had a relationship with him. This is despicable of him. It is like she is just a piece of garbage he wants to throw away.

[HairOfTheDog]

I feel terrible for a little girl somewhere who was not worth spending anything on. "Oh I'm sorry, I don't really love you, I thought I had to love you, but I don't. You're not mine."

I understand the man's feelings, and his anger. The fault obviously lies with the mother who betrayed him. But there is a little girl in the room too, who should never have to question her value, and the bulk of my pity lies with her.

[Mamzelle]

Oh, bleat, oh, whine. "Taliban" is after you! Poor baby.

There's a difference between the force of shar'ia law (what you affect to fear from erstwhile Calvinists like Mamzelle) and the force of the longterm consequence of immorality. It doesn't arrest you for public execution, it just hardens your heart to the fullness of life. It amazes me to have to write "ethics 101" to a conservative,

In other words, Boy of Buddha, it'll bite you in ways that don't require a sheriff or jail cell.

For instance, it seems easy for you at this stage to pronounce a cruel judgement on a child. At some point, this will either create an ugly callous in you or that child will find a way, indirectly, to return the favor. Not Zen, more like Karma.

[Jaidyn]

I have addressed the issue of the real father. He needs to be told. I have a feeling he was a married 'family' man at the time and the woman set her sites on this guy. As much as it will hurt the child, the hurt is inevitable. If the mother is worth a grain of salt, she will rectify the situation as much as humanly (motherly) possible. The guy might well be a jerk but he is entitled to his freedom of the child if that is his wish. I couldn't do that; you can't make someone love you but it doesn't take much to lose that love. If the guy was actually bonded to the little girl, he will be back......on his terms.

[BuddhaBoy]

1) Shack and shag. NEVER get married.
2) Sleep around! Wait to you get a live one then pay up.
3) Women get equal pay. Make 'em pay half.
4) Chivalry is dead, unless you can catch a bambi in a weak moment for the one night stand.

I'll say it again.

If this situation is ever going to change, men are going to have to refuse to marry and father children. When women understand that men are finally unwilling to be subject to legal extortion then things will change.

[F.J. Mitchell]

The guy has every right to demand a return of the child support that the mother took under a fradulent claim-he has every right to despise the mother for using him. If however he loves the child who was beguiled by her mother, same as he, he should continue the relationship he has with her, but because he wants to-not from obligation, and put the refunded child support (assuming he gets a refund) into a trust fund for the child.

THe innocent should not be abused as a substitute for punishing the guilty.

[ccmay]

Actually, the teachings of Christian sexual ethics are now, always have been and always will be a solution.

Yeah. Some solution.

-ccm

[BuddhaBoy]

When presented with logic, you can only resort to name calling, condesension and sarcasm. That means you have no real logical argument.

You know nothing of Ethics, or you might consider the factor ROOT CAUSE. Maybe you need a refresher?

The judgement is NOT on the child, but on the original victim of fraud. The ROOT CAUSE of this is the actions of the mother.

Dont talk Ethics101 with me, dear. I actually took the class. Either you didnt, and are just trying to make stupid points, or you need to find your old textbook.

[fooman]

You bet the real father needs to be told. If my real father found out today ( I am 34) that he is not my real father, I would not expect to remain bonded to him at all.

I would not want to force or coerce him to hang out with me in any way. Its unreasable to expect someone not to loathe you when they find out.

I think we are all giving the real father too much of a free pass. I dont care if he is the president of the US (williams), he should have to pay!

[Cicero]

If the woman agreed to give back the child support, he should have settled with her quietly and not gone public in a way that is certain to wreck the life of this innocent little girl. It's not her fault. And he should not regret the money he spent on making her happy.