Posted on 12/09/2002 9:04:51 AM PST by BuddhaBoy
DETROIT (AP) -- A package of bills sitting in a state Senate committee could free men from paying child support for children they did not father.
The proposals also would penalize a mother who deceives a man into believing he is the biological father of her child.
Traverse City dentist Damon Adams is pushing legislators to vote the bills -- passed last year by the state House -- into law.
Shortly after the end of his 25-year marriage, DNA tests proved Adams was not the father of the fourth child born to he and his wife.
"It was the worst feeling I've ever had to go through in my life," he told the Detroit Free Press for a Monday story.
Adams presented the DNA evidence to a judge, but was told to continue paying child support, which amounts to more than $18,000 a year.
He said the proposed legislation is in the best interest of children, who have a right to know their medical history.
"When something like this happens, the best way to heal is for the truth to come out," he said.
But Amy Zaagman, chief of staff for the chair of the state Senate Committee on Families, Mental Health and Human Services, said the bills -- which would allow men to keep parenting time with children -- raise serious questions.
"Here's someone who had a relationship with the child, established some responsibility for the child ... yet now he doesn't want to be responsible any more but wants parenting time?" she asked. "How does that benefit the child?"
Zaagman said committee Chairwoman Sen. Beverly Hammerstrom, R-Temperance, does not oppose the bills' concept, but has legal concerns.
For example, when a man who is not married signs paternity papers, he waives his right to a DNA test. If the man has any doubts, he should raise them before signing, not years later, Zaagman said.
John Ruff, 29, of Grand Rapids, said he believed his ex-girlfriend when she told him she was pregnant with his child more than eight years ago. So he signed the paternity papers, started paying child support and scheduled visitations.
Ruff requested a DNA test only after hearing rumors that the child was not his. Like Adams, Ruff presented evidence that he was not the father to a judge. He also was told to continue paying child support.
"I hate to say it, but the whole part where I went wrong was the part where I tried to stand up and be a man and take responsibility for what I thought was my daughter," said Ruff, who added that he has not seen the child since 1998.
"I should have been a jerk and tried to protest what (my ex-girlfriend) was saying."
Meri Anne Stowe, chairwoman of the Family Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan, said she can sympathize with men in such situations, but is more concerned about the children involved.
"We don't want to illegitimize a whole class of children, and we don't want to impoverish a whole class of children," Stowe said. "We have to look at the greater good."
This stuff is happening mostly in married couples, not just singles.
I personally advise men to avoid marriage at all costs, because it (along with parentage) provide the state with all the nessesary means to enslave him.
The end never justifies the means, no matter how appealing the end may be.
Nice.
So, a relationship based upon a deceitful lie is one that should be encouraged? Why should a man, betrayed by a woman, take the time and money out of his life to attempt to be a father to a child that is not his? He committed no crime. If I am the father, you may force me to pay child support.... but NO ONE may FORCE another to be a father. And again, the alleged father is the victim of fraud, and you are making him out to be the villian. The lying, deceitful mother is the felon.
I agree with your sentiments that non-biological parents can be a loving, lasting family relationship. However, as any adopting parent can tell you, they KNEW the child was not their biological child. It's merely a case of informed consent.
Welcome? It has always existed. However, women are now making the mistake of letting it become public knowledge, allowing men to react in kind.
When relationships become more and more like retail shopping, men are going to care a lot more about the "quality and freshness" factors in their purchasing decisions.
Many women are going to be left on the shelves for being either too old, too picked over, too expensive, too big, too small, or with poor packaging and marketing.
Let's see, a case of felonous fraud; a several clear cut cases where men are blackmailed (pay, or go to jail) into paying for children whom they did not father; and the poster has "one serious hangup"? Naturally, the problem is with the poster, not the law. < /sarcasm>
So elucidate. WHAT is the big deal? What's it to ya?
I sorta don't think this is all about your overweening concern for your fellow fellows.
Thats what bothers you, isnt it? LOL! How dare a man ENJOY women! How dare we have sex with them WITHOUT promising to support them and their progeny for a couple of decades!
How DARE we like sex! Dont we know that we are SUPPOSED to PAY for it?!?!?
We do pay, dear. Every time we come across a man-hating shrew like you.
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.