Another Paternity Fraud case.(30% of Paternity tests prove children fathered by other men.)

Philadelphia Inquirer ^ | 12/23/2002 | By Kathy Boccella

[Ben Bolt]

I was thinking out loud when I posted that while remembering how all of us kids decided to go with dad during the divorce & considering the topic of this thread .

" There's more to parentage than just money ... " . On 1 level you are correct but trying to provide for a family without it is impossible as you know .

Back when my parents got a divorce we did not have all of this bad caselaw like we do now wich is 1 of my points . In the end the best thing for the family unit to thrive is for a man & woman to marry there best friend .

[Post Toasties]

Men may hope for sex, but women decide. Everyone knows this is true. Men dont turn down a sexual opportunity, unless she is a true skank.

Don't speak for me here. I would not mess around with a married woman with children.

[marajade]

"Sex is ALWAYS the woman's decision."

You're assuming that women are psychologically normal and know that to be true... Its a sick world out there...

[HEY4QDEMS]

there's more than just the money end of parenting

I agree 100% but the "money end" is all that the original post is addressing in calling for reform to child support laws in cases of paternity fraud.

[marajade]

I'm just using my own personal life as a theory... its a very plausible one in relation to the article in this thread is it not?

[Post Toasties]

Unless it was my wife, ha ha.

[marajade]

"I am all in favor of women who are raped having abortions..."

Why blame the innocent child for the crime?

[End The Hypocrisy]

>>>In the end the best thing for the family unit to thrive is for a man & woman to marry there best friend.<<<


But in college don't they say "never room with your best friend?"

[marajade]

Maybe it has to do with the fact that we are both women...

[Post Toasties]

Yes, potentially. However, I don't see letting the guy off the hook in the great majority of cases if he's as thoughtless as the woman, regardless. Besides, didn't you imply that he wasn't a breadwinner, IAC? It would seem that nothing' from nothin' equals nothin' if so.

[marajade]

"In the end the best thing for the family unit to thrive is for a man & woman to marry there best friend ."

On that we agree... Personally, I don't know what's worse? emotional starvation or physical starvation... I know what child advocates would say but maybe its because I have a difficult time seeing from any other way than from a personal viewpoint...

[Post Toasties]

Besides, with an already troubled marriage, the argument could easily be made that knowing the man was having children by others' wives could be seen as a positive opportunity to make that break with less overall emotional damage.

[NCLaw441]

What is so sad about all of this is that children are no longer valued. They are reduced to a bargaining chip.

That is not accurate. Children who are born should be supported. The issue is WHO should support these children. I find it interesting that feminist groups (not to suggest that you are a member of one) continue to urge the dependency of mothers on "fathers" who, in these cases, are not the fathers at all. I would propose something of a middle ground. Husbands whose wives have children should be presumed to be the father, but in the event that the true father is determined, he should be made to support the child, and the husband/victim (why shouldn't HE be allowed to be a victim for a change) be relieved of this obligation. Of course it is not the child's fault, but it is not the husband/non-father's fault either. I find the contrary thinking akin to those who would hold gun manufacturers (and now cell phone manufacturers)liable for misuse of their products resulting in injury to others. The theory seems to be, find nearby deep pockets and assert liability. The temptation is to grant relief to someone who needs it, irrespective of the message it sends to others who may be contemplating similar behavior.
That which we subsidize we encourage.

[marajade]

Then maybe the feminists as some have called them on this thread who are against it haven't thoroughly thought it out...

[tortoise]

I would have been better off without the kind of father I had...

Whereas I on the other hand would have been better off without the kind of mother I had. Case by case basis, I'd say.

[dogbyte12]

Tell it to the child. I have no problem introducing the real father, as that is only right, but punishing the child to get back at the mother is wrong and immoral. Put yourself in the child's shoes and see how you'd feel.

The problem with this argument is that it perpetuates bad behaviour. It leaves women free to screw around, then hold the child as a shield, and say think of them. You aren't the biological father, as the man in this case, your chances of custody are even lower. The child support payments don't have to be spent on the kid, only as the mother sees fit. Not a happy situation.

Much of child support is hidden alimony. One thing I think that might work, is a debit card. You can not buy liquor, or stereos, or tickets to R-rated movies, with your child support debit card. Groceries, books, clothes, etc can be purchased with the card. It it utterly unfair that a man would have to pay out this money, and not even be sure if it is going to the child.

In most cases, the money is actually supporting the child, but why does a woman who screw around while married, get to be on the honor system, in dispursing money for said child?

[marajade]

Agree...

[Centurion2000]

bump for later review

[End The Hypocrisy]

Oh yes, I think that advice regarding marriage from the (recently discovered adultress) Dr. Laura is worth less in light of her self-serving deceptiveness over the years about her own transgressions. But admittedly she does stand for what many women who file for divorce nowadays stands for..."adultery's permissible because he was an inadequate spouse [despite marital vows that I made when trying to strike it rich]." This is a generalization of course, but there's at least a kernel of truth to what I'm saying.