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."
What a load of manure. If anyone has been harming these children, it's their lying, cheating mothers. They perpetrated fraud and now, not unlike Sadam and other Middle Eastern terrorists, they want to hide behind the children when their fraud is discovered and verified. Absolute moral cowardice on their part.
If a male is fraudulently duped into believing a child who is not his is his responsiblity, he should not be punished when the truth is discovered. Yes, I said punished. The mother should be prosecuted and punished just as if she had used deception to defraud the public for the same amount of money. The duped "father" should be able to seek restitution. The mother should be legally compelled to reveal who the true biological father is and the state should verify this claim with DNA testing, after which they should assign the appropriate amount of parental financial responsibility.
As for the emotional attachment and bond between the duped father and, of course, innocent child/children, the decision of whether/how to continue the parental relationship should be left up to the duped father. He should be given an appropriate amount of time to decide how he wants to proceed and should be given parental rights if he wants them. Do you honestly think that if a real bond has developed between "father" and child that the father just walks away with no emotional damage? Or do you really just equate fatherly responsibilities with giving the mother money? Why is it OK in your book to forget about justice and decency in how these men have been treated because "a child might be harmed"? Who created that situation in these cases? Why don't you insist that the mother be held accountable for her actions? Why should the government have any interest other than finding the biological father and holding him financially responsible? Or can a woman perpetrate any foul deceipt she wants to in your world and then hide behind her children?
What motivates this thread is an animus, a barely covered rage against that cheatin' broad. (Witness Buddha's bad temper.) The only way to punish her, however, involves punishing a child who did no cheatin'. The outraged "daddy," however, did not go without sex. The urge to strike out at a child does not exactly endear him either to me or the average judge.
(sticking my tongue out at you, also)
I have argued such on many occasions and strongly support a man's right to choose.
If a women has the right to choose to not be a parent, then as proscribed by the equal protection clause of the US Constitution, a man also has a right to choose.
Though I would proscribe that the man must declare that he doesnt want to be a parent prior to birth.
Leaving traditonal sexual morality aside, as is happening more and more these days, I am not attempting to criticize the Boy as much as I am constructing a question. The question is, "If it can't happen to you, due to the precautions you take, why is it such an overwhelming concern?" You can buy his claims of brotherly charity, but I think there's something interesting in this story.
So as long as the male was "gettin some" then it not matter a bit that the child isn't his, he should just pay up and be thankful he was gettin some.
Techically, no.
First, the assertion was made in a delivery room, not in a court of law, while under oath.
Also, there are no laws that I know of that CRIMINALIZE the act of listing the wrong name of the father on a Birth Certificate. The law has recognized that for many women, they have no idea who the father of their child might be.
Some list no father's name at all, but for those wishing to recieve Welfare for their child, it is MANDATED by law, that they list the father, so that the State can enforce support payments against him.
Please.
The point which you have avoided is that the adults are adults (responsible) and the child is a child.
If you have an accusation to make, I suggest you make it.
Clearly, in the matter being discussed the female adult is not responsible in more ways than one. It is obvious that the child has a biological parent. If she wants to receive child support she should track that man down and get it from him. She should not be lying to the man she claims to be the father and she should not be lying to the courts about who the father is so as to collect child support from the lied to man.
There was a 15 year old kid in Mass. last year whose girlfriend became pregnant. Thinking he was the father he took full responsibility, got a job and upon birth started paying child support. Shortly after that he questioned the mother about who the father was after he heard talk of him not being the father. She said he was and he demaned a paternatiy test. It showed he was NOT the father.
He then sued her in court to remove his child support responsibility. The court ruled that he MUST continue to pay child support AND PAY FOR THE KIDS COLLEGE EDUCATION!
A few weeks back there was a case of the man suing for recompense, not for support, but for toys given and hamburgers bought.
You are needed elsewhere!! Stop them! ROTFLMAO!
ROFLOL
I have never pretended NOT to take this issue personally, so if that is your claim, you are inventing a strawman to argue against.
The fact that I am safe from this kind of fraud myself, does not make it any less an issue. I think your problem is that I like women. Lots of them. As many and as often as I can. Deal with it.
ANY man, regardless of celibacy, monogamy, or vasectomy, is currently at risk for financial ruin due to child support. Here's how it works --
(A)A slut whom I've never slept with, let alone sired a child on, randomly picks me and names me the father of her child.
(B) She submits my name to the Child Support agencies, but gives a false or old address.
(C) I never receive the notice, and don't show up in court. (The court will not make any further attempt to locate me... BEFORE the judgement, anyway.)
(D) Since I don't show up, I never have a chance to contest paternity, or demand a DNA test.
(E) The court enters a "default judgement" of paternity which CANNOT be overturned.
(F) All of the sudden, personnel at work calls me to tell me about a garnishment order. (That's the first time I'll ever hear about it.) A large percentage of my money will be taken away, and my family will plummet into POVERTY.
At this point I have no recourse. It doesn't matter if the DNA doesn't match. It doesn't matter if I never slept with the woman. In fact, it doesn't even matter if I never met the woman -- some men have been nailed just by having the same name as an accused father! Once a default judgement has been entered, it's all over.
My sexual morality doesn't protect me... or your husband.... or your son. A man like me, who stayed a virgin til marriage and has been 100% faithful afterward, can STILL be plundered to support a child that's not his. And neither my rights, nor my wife's rights, nor the best interests of MY OWN children would matter a hill of beans.
Therefore, despite my morals, paternity fraud threatens me, too. So, much as I may disapprove of promiscuous men, I totally agree with them on this issue.
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.