Man jailed for not paying child support for kid the court knows is not his

I agree things like that happen but at the same time I'm not advocating that is the way to go. Your mother made a decision that she felt was in her and your's best interest. The woman of the child in question made a decision that she thought was in her and her child's best interest. Without knowing more I'm not going to condemn her for trying to con Hatley.

 

That's the problem . . . what about this MAN'S BEST Interest.

Rocket River

 

So what if it's in her best interest to lie and say he is the father? She can't claim that she doesn't know if that guy is the father. She knows he is not the father after DNA tests. He is sitting in jail for not paying child support for another man's child. That's nuts.

 

American famiy law has gone too far to the feminist side. The court of laws have castrated men and turned them into powerless eunuchs that subsidize unemployed sluts that don't know who fathered their kids.

These women need to get a damn job and get the broke ass father to support the kid, instead of just naming the guy that had the most money.

 

Your relationship is obviously a bedrock of trust.

 

And here is the problem with that argument.

SHE had to of known that there was a chance the child wasn't his. So based on that alone, she wittingly took payments in the form of child support from a person she could not be certain was the biological father.


Why does this crap only work out for mothers of children? Its not like I can get in an accident with three other vehicles and say...yeah of the three cars I believe it was that guy so give me anything I can sue him for. If it turned out I sued in court the wrong person and was paid damages that I claimed could of only been from X person, but it was proven later on that Y person caused the accident and I hid this information, then I would then be liable.


And you keep making reference to him having a choice to sleep with her, and that there are consequences to sex.

That in and of itself does not make him liable to pay for a child that is not his. Fact of the matter is the only person who you can blame in any of this is her. Because she HAD to know she slept with more than one person. It was HER responsibility to make sure she had the right father, and SHE choose to lie about it. Obviously she didn't tell him there was a chance it was someone elses child.

All women who commit this crime should be punished. Its as easy as filing out paperwork stating that you in fact do know that such person has to be the father and and any future findings to the contrary will lead to reimburstment of all payments made to such child.

And yes its a crime to hid the fact that he was not the father. Regardless of weather or not she "knew" it was his. She knew there were other dudes.

I say make it a punishable crime to not disclose if support payments are in affect. Then if the father decides to pay anyways it was on him. EASY fix.

 

Repped (even if the correlation is indirect, still...)

Until you're that deadbeat dad. We believe women have the more noble pursuit in their motherhood. That they ALWAYS have the childs best interest in mind, and when its about the child they're always in the right. But thats almost like saying all NBA players are competent decision makers and dont smoke weed.

Women simply dont have incentive to make good sounds decisions cuz they'll always have support no matter what they do. Some of these women go from heavily tattooed minxes, pregnant then to mother earth within a year. And hold any man they're with to an absurdly high degree of competence or he's no good. Its exactly what it looks like - acknowledge the baby bump, and gimme all the attention and the money, or why not marry my ass off since you're snared in anyways. No matter what kind of jobless, criminal record loser they willingly hop into bed every night, all it takes is being in distress then demanding for the p***y whooped nation to give in.

Women are too big to fail.

 

If one of my friends randomly put some horses in my backyard for me to raise, sure horses are cool and lovable but I'm gonna go find out who did it. And I'm not gonna pick out just ONE friend, gonna interrogate everyone remotely connected. Nothing wrong with her seeking out somebody. But she sobbed and whimpered in the 1 respectable guy thatd put up with her crap. Instead of summoning in the panel of men she was involved with, so she wouldnt look like a trollop in the eyes of the people. She's performing the correct actions of doing what needs to be done for the child. But her selectivity was too limited. And SHE KNEW THAT.

Also, if I'm with a company and I'm liable for thousands of dollars of damages to their vehicles, if after I'm long gone from that company and I'm still paying them that they find out it really wasnt my fault that it was an equipment issue, my payments stop then an THERE. WHY did the courts rule the man to still pay on a child for the period "the child was still technically his" when really there's NO technicality to it? He technically banged her a few nights in the 80's and thats that. At the very least his remaining payment obligation should have been cut in half or more.

 

When you work in an office for a few years that does a lot of family law, you will see how dumb your post is.

The vast, overwhelming number of women receiving child support payments have a job. Raising a child is expensive. Women disproportionately bear the burden of raising the child. The guy just takes off and leaves her holding the bundle of joy. Keep in mind that there is an enforcement mechanism in place because of all of the fathers out there that decided that they did not want to man up and support their children.

Once faced with contempt of court, you would be amazed at how much money the deadbeat "finds."

In Texas, a defense to enforcement is that you could not pay and had no ability to obtain the funds to pay. (ie unemployed and no family that could or would float you the cash)

 

I'm in Georiga.

The law on the books basically says that if a man pays child supports for a child (w/o a court order) then he gets to play the role of "daddy" regardless of what later DNA tests may say.

I hate to say it, but think of it like a traffic ticket. Once you pay it voluntarily, you admitted guilt. Regardless of what new evidence you may have, that case is closed.

The same kind of thinking applies in this situation. The real reason behind the thinking that nobody wants to admit (the 1,000 lb gorilla in the room) is that the State does not want another mouth to feed.

As with most things, money drives it all

********

P.S. Yes, its a load of bull.....makes me not want to have kids or even be involved with a woman who has kids. But that is the U.S. goverment for you.

 

Obviously not supporting a child is wrong......and if I did have a kid I would do what I had to do (After DNA testing proves that I am the real father).

But in an attempt to nail dead beat fathers, the legal system has created many pitfalls that trap innocent men in compromising situations.

It may be best to not even get involved....I'm still on the fence as far as that goes.

 

Sorry for the flood of posts. (Not sure how to edit)

*******

I saw somebody on the first page mention that even if his wife was pregnant he would test to see if the child was actually his. That is a good idea.

In Georiga (not sure about other states but I would assume the same) any child born in wedlock is considered to be the child of the man in the relationship until otherwise proven. Therefore, if there is any doubt it is best to get the test and attempt to avoid crippling child support payments that are not your own.

(Because you better believe the State is not trying to feed that kid.)

 

So good, innocent men should be punished because other men are deadbeats. Gotcha.

 

I don't think thats his point, I don't understand some of the animosity towards child support. Women aren't getting rich, child support is 20% after tax in texas for one child. if a guy is making $100,000 a year and lets say he takes home $70,000, that's fourteen thousand.

now alimony, that's a silly concept imo.

 

you have trust. . . for things you cannot prove

When you have the opportunity to be 99.9% positive. . . . you take it

Rocket River

 

i actually agree with this, although i'm not married yet. BUT i have asked my previous gfs to get tested before we do it w/o any prophylaxis .

i feel bad for the dude though.

 

My problem with it is that it is an unequal situation in how we treat
parenthood for men . . and we treat parenthood for women
[post conception]

Parenthood for women are built on a variety of options which include the ability to force someone to assist in the payment of the child

Parenthood for men is basically pay .. . . period.

Women have several options to walk away from this responsibility, they have options on what rights to grant the father, and the government supports all of them.

Men generall have not rights and basically live at the whims of the woman.

Women can Abort the baby, Give it up for adoption [basically be relinquished of all emotion, financial and social responsibility for a child] - hell they can drop the tyke off at the fire house. None of these options are truly available to a man. If a man wants to give up all those responsibilities, the woman has to agree to it [i.e. she has a husband now that she wants to be 'daddy' and want the man kicked out of the picture]

If the woman decides to keep the child - she knows the courts will force the man to be a contributor whether he wants to or not. again. she has a choice and he does not.

Women don't even have to inform the father. If I found out I had a son 15 yrs ago. I have been DENIED MY PARENTAL RIGHTS - but what the hell is anyone going to do about it? not a d*mn thing. Cause Me missing out on birthdays, 1st days of school and important ***** like that is simply not important. My rights are not important. Father's rights are simply NOT IMPORTANT.

The order of governent protecting the rights of those involve in the arena of reportuctive rights are this:
1. THE MOTHER IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT PERSON IN THE WORLD OF REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS
2. THE CHILD's rights are a distant second
3. The father is simply not important at all

Rocket River

 

Men should not be paying child support to a kid that is not their own.
The system does not care if you ever slept with that person or if it is mistaken identity.

Even if it's case of mistaken identity, they will not cancel the judgement. They just do searches for a name and pick somebody to be father.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/29035.html

 

Even if the mother admits the child is not the man's, they will continue to pursue support.