Posted on 12/09/2002 7:27:06 AM PST by BuddhaBoy
Part One:
Paternity fraud occurs when a mother lies about who the biological father of a child really is. It can occur between non-married individuals or within a marriage.
Unfortunately, most men discover the lie after a relationship has ended. Many have no idea how to react, complicated by intense emotions described as “feelings worse than a death”. Denial, pain, mourning, and anger phases often paralyze them with indecision while having to make timely legal moves.
Most lawyers discourage action, or are unfamiliar with this area of law so then disbelief sets in, followed by utter frustration. The man who did not create the child most often bears both emotional scars and the financial consequences. The child must deal into adulthood with serious psychological consequences from the unbelievable fact that their mother, who they should have been able to trust completely, lied to them and their (non-biological) “father”.
Meanwhile, the “deadbeat bio-dads” are left to go about their lives without responsibility and in total ignorance of the havoc they helped create.
DNA testing causing biological fathers to admit paternity has increased from 512,000 in 1992, to 1.5 million in 1999. (U.S. department of Health and Human Services). This is a definite benefit with DNA testing. Unfortunately, the courts and legislation of most states allow and support paternity fraud by refusing to exonerate “fathers” whose only crime was to trust their wife or significant other.
The court system seems to saying to all of us, “Its OK to lie about who the father of a child really is, as long as someone is paying, there will be no accountability”. Currently, a woman can submit DNA evidence in court to prove paternity, but a man cannot use DNA evidence to prove he is not the father in most states. Criminals can even use DNA evidence to clear their record.
Equal civil rights and due process, under State Laws and the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, should apply to paternity fraud as in all other cases of civil fraud.
Opponents of DNA testing often say that it is not in the “best interest of the child” to DNA test especially after a relationship is formed with a man. Still others say, “the man was just a sperm donor, it is the relationship that makes a “father” a father. A “good” man would just say nothing and raise the child. Ignore it, live the lie, and go on?
Parent a child with a mother he obviously cannot trust in a country where abuse charges are rampant? And where is the “good” biological father in all this? Society has long acknowledged the connection between biological parents and their children.
Courts have even returned children to their birth parents after years of living with the wrong parents. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged the right of biological parents to raise their children in Stanley v. Illinois. It is only right that both biological parents should be raising their child unless it is a situation of mutual consent or adoption.
Georgia just became the most recent state on May 9, 2002, to sign a Paternity Fraud Relief Bill {HB369} into law. The votes were 163-0 in the House and 45-5 in the Senate. Ohio’s Governor signed HB 242 into law on July 27, 2000. These bills passed across political, gender, racial, and religious lines.
Rep. Peter Lawson who sponsored the bill in Ohio said, “Ohio no longer rewards mothers who lie about who the father of their child is.” The legal landscape will be changing soon with the introduction of bills in Florida, California, Oklahoma, New Jersey, Oregon, and Vermont. Michigan Paternity Fraud Bills HB4635 and HB4636 were sent to the Senate in July 2001 with a unanimous (102-0) vote. These important bills now deserve to be heard and discussed by the Michigan Senate.
Part Two: The Human and Medical Implications
“Children are afraid of the dark. Adults are afraid of the light.”
Ms. Betsy Keefer and Ms. Jayne Schooler have over 60 years of combined experience in child welfare issues. In their recent book, Telling the Truth to…Children, they convincingly report the devastation to people who have been deliberately lied to as children. “While secrets can almost always be lethal, open communication rarely is.” They also say, “Every person has a right to know their own medical history.”
Dianne Seltzer, a cancer survivor, in a recent interview with Lifetime said, “They (immediately) mapped out our entire family background.” She and her oncologist believe it was her accurate family medical history that saved her life. The Mayo Clinic reported in Family Cancer Syndromes (9/02), “Talking with your family about cancer may be the one way to learn more about your own risks.”
How can children who have been lied to about who their biological father know their true medical history and thus be fully armed in their lifetime fight against diseases? Imagine the horror of a recent case in California where a young child suffering from leukemia died an excruciating death after a transplant rejection from a stranger’s bone marrow. The child had eight siblings, none of whom shared her HLA type. Why? Because she was conceived by another man. No one representing the real biological family was ever tested. Her best chance was nullified because her mother did not have to share the child’s genetic history with the hospital or the courts. No one asked the mother and she did not tell. She knew she could lose her child support.
Most Judges do not take the time to understand the depths of this human struggle for truth and justice. Nor with their training, do they fully understand the severe medical or psychological implications of their decisions for the children involved. Sadly, the actual voices of the “father” and innocent child, the victims of this fraud, are rarely given the chance to be heard in our courtrooms. It is relegated to legalities, court rules, and lots of money for the attorneys. Costs for these cases range between $25,000-$250,000 (and up) for the defrauded men with little chance to win. Ironically, it is the same men who have been lied to that are often humiliated with lectures on what it means to be a father while ordered to continue the support. Maybe it is time that the fraudulent mothers get the lectures and are asked to do what is right. Admit the truth and name the biological father.
To appreciate the human side of this matter, consider the following heartfelt testimony that Mrs. Kelly Nudelman gave to help pass paternity fraud legislation in Georgia. She is a mother and the wife of a husband caught in the web of paternity fraud from a former spouse.
“For those of you that are parents, take a moment to think about the joy you felt when you welcomed your child into this world. The feelings are indescribable. And that is just the beginning. The love grows many fold throughout the years. Now think about how you would feel if you found out that child was not really yours. You were tricked. You were used. You had no part in bringing that child into this world. It makes you sick. Now you are a paycheck. I’ve watched my husband feel this pain. I’ve watched it tear his heart out. Never, again can my husband look at this child the same way. Never again will his relationship be the same with that child. And never again will our family have a normal life.”
It is time we wake up to the real problem. Fraud is fraud. Lying "deadbeat moms" and "deadbeat bio-dads" should be held responsible. Governor Engler recently began a voluntary DNA testing program for babies born in Michigan. Mandatory DNA testing at all births would prevent this problem from ever occurring. (Privacy issues? Anyone who takes a bodily sample from you in a lab or hospital can already have your DNA information, if they want it.)
How can we truly celebrate Mother's Day and Father's Day in a country that allows this kind of blatant injustice, destruction of families, and dishonesty? It will not end unless we act by writing and calling on our legislators to support paternity fraud legislation like MI HB 4635/4636. Some of us are being personally tasked with the fight for truth and have refused to tolerate lying to the children. The rest of us need to stop the silence on this epidemic and preventable human tragedy.
We need to take action by contacting our legislators immediately.
What I and many others are opposed to is treating children like hostages. Whether that is how the industry you worked in designed it or not, that is what it has become. Since I don't know you personally, I'd have a hard time laying any specific blame at your doorstep for how things are, but I would hope that you couldn't possibly, in any way, think that this system is loaded with bias against fathers from top to bottom.
They are human beings who are innocent of any of the wrong-doing of their parents.
I won't presume to speak for anyone else on FR, but in my view you would be hard pressed to find a father around here who would ever want to blame their children for anything in cases like these. That being said, actions have consequences...it's an immovable law of how the universe works. Some consequences are good, some are neutral, and some are bad. As a former domestic relations court judge, perhaps you can answer this: Why is it that when there is a negative consequence in anything regarding custody of children, the industry almost invarriably will shift as much of that consequence as it can onto the father? Is it because that if the the mother actually has to suffer the consequences for defrauding someone that it would be "unfair" to the child? If so, then you are not doing that child, or society as a whole, any favors. Kids don't stay little forever. At some point, no matter how much anyone tries to shelter them, they will notice what's going on around them. Are you saying that it would be in that childs best interest to see that a woman (his mother, no less!) can lie, commit fraud for financial gain, and know that she will not be required to make restitution or suffer any consequences because she can hide behind a child? Women who do these kind of selfish acts are effectively using their own kids as human shields. What if a mother robbed a bank? No gun, just handed the teller a note that demanded the money in the teller's drawer and gets caught walking out of the bank. Should she not suffer the consequences for theft because if she did, it would punish her kids? Should the father of her children have to pay back the bank because it would punish the kids if he didn't pay for her actions?
Children learn by example. What kind of example are they learning from if they see that their mother can do something as base as paternity fraud and get away with it?
JUST SO HE HAS A JOB AND/OR MONEY,
and then say he is the father, give that on the papers when the child is born!
Are there really some men so foolish [or macho as to want to have it claimed they did this] as to go along with this and PAY?
What did Barnum say?
In some situations, over a period of years the child has bonded with the dad and the relationship is loving. Resolving a mistaken or fraudulent paternity matter in that circumstance is difficult. The truth usually only comes to light because the parents are splitting up and the mother is either looking to hurt her ex or is bargaining for custody. The man doesn't necessarily turn his back on the child as much as he is running for cover after being bombarded with devaststing testimony by his ex. In time the wounds on both sides (father and child)may heal, after the lawyers are gone.
This is one of those topics that, even though it hasn't happened to me, the subject still raises my blood pressure. IMHO, anyone who would let a woman who commits this kind a fraud off with no consequences is almost as bad as the person who committed the fraud. As was mentioned in another post, the policy of allowing this to happen is legally establishing that two wrongs make a right.
Uh, I think Tacis was merely putting in writing what goes through the head of a liberal when considering these issues.
Well, then I hope you either don't sleep around or have gotten things 'fixed' so this won't be an issue for you.
I agree 100% that it is wrong for a woman to force a man to support a child that is not biologically his with certain exceptions. (For example, if the couple has been married for years and the child has thought of the man as 'daddy' essentially all of his/her life and he/she is older than just a toddler.)
It would also be wrong for the guy to 'pretend' to be a dad through visitation while not giving a dime to help the child.
So what consequence should she face for her actions?
What they are also saying is that if they cannot garnish his paycheck, they have no further use for him. Their policy is "pay up and shut up."
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.