Man owes child support, child not his
 

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/11/pat...ses/index.html

this is not the first time i have seen this happen...This Fl man owes 10k for a child that is not his. even the paternity test proves he is not the father, but the courts are insisting he pay since he missed a deadline to contest it.

what do you all think? is it fair to make a man pay child support for a child who is not biologically his, assuming he has not adopted the child or any other odd circumstances...

This is ridiculous. I can't believe any judge would allow such a thing as a result of a technicality.

My step-father divorced his first wife years ago but continued to pay child support for the last two of his four children. He had a sneaking suspicion that they weren't his (their physical traits were kinda obvious), so he finally got a paternity test done. By the time the tests and court crap were done, both children were already adults. Still, the court made his evil ex-wife pay him back for all the years of child support he paid.

He still loves the children as his own and provides for them as much as he can still, but his ex-wife knew that my step-dad wasn't the father all that time. Turns out she was having an affair with another guy for 10 years while they were married (the kids are 7 yrs. apart) and still she made my step-dad pay $$$. What a bitch.

It's not that unusual for judges to enforce child support, usually the welfare of the child is cited as a reason. It's not fair to the fathers at all, but there's unequal treatment in family court for mothers and fathers.

It sounds as if we're getting this report in the middle of the case.

Maybe we're at the point as a society at which part of the child support legal paperwork should require a DNA test.

I don't think men should be required to pay child support for a child who isn't theirs, and in cases where the mother knows the kid isn't his, I think she should have to pay it back and face fraud charges.

(You'd think any women would have the decency figure out definitively who the father is, but I suspect in some cases, she really does think that man paying is the father.)

I do think there's a little danger in courts not assuming that the husband is the father of a wife's baby*, but when there is no marriage or there's a divorce with support ordered, it's worth doing a test.

*You could get into some weird stuff with estates. Would every heir need to prove that he or she was biologically the offspring of a deceased man to receive an inheritance? You'd also have to use a different standard, obviously, for adopted children. The man shouldn't be allowed to shift the financial burden on to the mom if he elected to adopt the kid despite neither of them being biologically related.

Personally, I'd shoot the judge if I was him. And then ask the court to make another man spend time in jail instead of me.

-Rudey

It's hard enough to get some bio dads to pay . . .
 

It doesn't matter - trust me when I say that just because you are ordered to pay child support doesn't mean you will. And when deadbeat dad doesn't? You can pay a lawyer to take him to court - and get a very expensive piece of paper which says he owes it. YIPPEE.
NOT THAT I'M BITTER.:rolleyes:

I thought they arrested them these days?

-Rudey

You have to go through so many hoops - my ex is currently in contempt of at least 5 orders, owes me thousands - but it doesn't become a felony in Texas until they hit $10,000. It is - to say the least - frustrating.

Yep, my family is acquainted with this system, as well. You wouldn't believe how much someone can get away with. Hundreds of thousands of dollars, even. There are just so many cases of owed child support out there that the courts can't keep up, nevermind that if the person owing money moves to another state it's nearly impossible for the courts to find and keep on top of them. And family law prosecutors don't make the big bucks, so it's not like it's a job people are dying to do.

As for throwing them in jail, c'mon, our prisons don't have enough room for violent criminals...you expect them to put deadbeat dads away?

My sister has it even worse - her ex is out of state, so the state of Texas really can't be bothered.
In my experience, the judge will threaten jail, but then allow the deadbeat to set up a "payment system". Hey, my ex currently has 5 different "payment plans" in place - not that he's paying any of them . . .

Does he see your kids and participate in their lives? Or is he completely gone?

One thing that I've never understood is why guys quit being fathers to their kids when they get divorced.

When they get extremely limited visitation even though there was no reason for it (I mean like abuse as a reason), and in cases where the mother seems to be spending a lot of the money on herself (www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1115283908919), I can kind of understand why they get frustrated with having to pay a lot of support.

But in cases where the dad leaves the family and then just seems to feel like it's okay to stop all support, I'm completely baffled.

I think that maybe we should go to a system when the father is required to specifically pay for certain kinds of support, like he's obligated to pay so much of the mortgage or rent directly to the bank or landlord. Or he's required to put so much money into a medical flexible spending account or college saving account. With clothing and food, it'd be harder.

But one of the reasons I think some losers default is that they think of the money going to the wife, and if they weren't paying it to the wife, maybe they'd be more likely to pay?

The judges probably think that you want the money more than you want him in jail, so they keep him out and working. But since you aren't getting the money anyway, it seems like it's time.

lmao! i agree!

and i def do agree charges should be brought up if it can be proven the wife/girlfriend cheated, and hid the fact that she was unsure of the paternity. it is not right to trap a man/lie to the courts and make him pay his hard earned money if she was being a scandalous ho. in his case, even she said it wasnt his. can't quite figure out the judges decision behind that...

i feel it should be left up to the father if its not your child, but you ever see those dads on Maury, that dont care whose child it is, they will raise it anyway? if it isnt his child legally or biologically, allow the man to decide whether to step up and help out or not. of course, there wont be a lot who will, cant say that id blame them...

Sadly, I think you're right. Of course, it will absolutely kill the Montel circuit.