• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules

Also, the court should have required the attorneys for the state to find the biological fathers and have them waive their parental rights going forward BEFORE a decision was made in this case. As it stands now, the bio fathers probably can sue for custody AND have this fellow continue to pay for the kids' support.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I'm just a naive seeker of knowledge - perhaps Americans are all just auditioning for a spot on Jerry Springer or Maury
Click to expand...

I will believe you are a "tongue-in-cheek" naive seeker of knowledge. Anything beyond that....nah :)
 
clownboy said:
Also, the court should have required the attorneys for the state to find the biological fathers and have them waive their parental rights going forward BEFORE a decision was made in this case. As it stands now, the bio fathers probably can sue for custody AND have this fellow continue to pay for the kids' support.
Click to expand...
i doubt the woman would even know who the real fathers are
much less be able to track them down 12-16 years later for a DNA test
 
justabubba said:
it would seem this fellow had at least THREE occasions for doubt ... and a subsequent test
Click to expand...

Although many here have been highly critical of the actions of the husband in this case, you have to accept that this man was aware of his wife's affairs and chose to honor the marriage, forgive her, stay with her, maybe for the children, and then fathered another child, the last one. Whatever happened in the last year to cause the marriage to break up, it can't be denied that he at least seriously gave it a go and didn't just bolt. He may have had some doubts about the parentage of his three daughters but he didn't abandon them or his wife. What happened recently, that causes him to fight child support, might have absolutely nothing to do with his relationship with the children themselves.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules | Canada | News | Toronto Sun

I have absolutely no sympathy for this man. Married for sixteen years, raising four children for over a decade-- and he demands a paternity test when he gets a divorce? I think about the message that sends his children and all I can think is "**** this guy". And I reject the notion that, again, after a decade of raising three children that he is anything but their real father.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree with the ruling. They aren't his kids. And btw, he might just be a terrible person and not want to pay anything, and that's his right, but he might also would rather it to where his money goes towards the kids how he demands it. He can give them money for certain things, pay for their education etc. Which is much better than just demanding it that he gives the money straight to the mother. If it were me, I'd help those kids out as if they were my own, but I'd be damned if I would just cut their mother a check every month.
 
Muddy Creek said:
I have to agree. His spite is directed at the wife, but the children are the ones caught in the crossfire. I agree with the law in that he continues to pay child support.
Click to expand...
"Child support" is a very misleading term here.

The money does NOT go to the children, it goes to the mother who will spend it any way she wants to. Like buy heroin or whatever.
 
justabubba said:
and the estranged spouse should have his day in court, at his own time and expense. nothing has deprived him of that opportunity to evidence fraud
Click to expand...

That is what the DNA test did here. ;)
 
roughdraft274 said:
I completely disagree with the ruling. They aren't his kids. And btw, he might just be a terrible person and not want to pay anything, and that's his right, but he might also would rather it to where his money goes towards the kids how he demands it. He can give them money for certain things, pay for their education etc. Which is much better than just demanding it that he gives the money straight to the mother. If it were me, I'd help those kids out as if they were my own, but I'd be damned if I would just cut their mother a check every month.
Click to expand...
as the legal father of all four children, it would seem he is not pursuing custody, which would then eliminate that concern about how his dollars were being spent
 
Muhammed said:
"Child support" is a very misleading term here.

The money does NOT go to the children, it goes to the mother who will spend it any way she wants to. Like buy heroin or whatever.
Click to expand...

Hopefully, she saves a little for birth control, going forward.
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
Two points.

One, once the man signs that contract, he is the father, legally and morally.
Click to expand...

I don't see what is moral about this situation, but sure its legal.

Two, he's more than welcome to have the paternity test performed before he signs it. If he isn't willing to do that because he's afraid of pissing off the mother, then it's his own stupid fault.
Click to expand...

Ok, and if he has no reason to doubt the mother than exactly why would he? .
 
Henrin said:
I don't see what is moral about this situation, but sure its legal.



Ok, and if he has no reason to doubt the mother than exactly why would he? .
Click to expand...
to quote ronnie raygun "trust, but verify"
 
justabubba said:
as the legal father of all four children, it would seem he is not pursuing custody, which would then eliminate that concern about how his dollars were being spent
Click to expand...

Just because the law takes money from him and he has no say on how it is spent doesn't mean its not his concern. Frankly, if I was to support a child support system by the state(in which I don't) it would have go towards the child and set up in a way where the mother can not use it for anything else. Not sure how that work, but that is how it should be.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Although many here have been highly critical of the actions of the husband in this case, you have to accept that this man was aware of his wife's affairs and chose to honor the marriage, forgive her, stay with her, maybe for the children, and then fathered another child, the last one. Whatever happened in the last year to cause the marriage to break up, it can't be denied that he at least seriously gave it a go and didn't just bolt. He may have had some doubts about the parentage of his three daughters but he didn't abandon them or his wife. What happened recently, that causes him to fight child support, might have absolutely nothing to do with his relationship with the children themselves.
Click to expand...

From my reading of the article it just says he was aware of the affairs at some point before the results came back. Is it specified that he knew for a significant period of time or just something that came out in the course of a messy breakup and thus prompted the test?
 
justabubba said:
to quote ronnie raygun "trust, but verify"
Click to expand...

Yeah..yeah...If we are allowed to get back to the real world for a second its generally understood that part of the foundation of a relationship is trust and clearly a part of that is not thinking they are constantly cheating on you and asking for DNA tests.

It just makes no sense to say the contract is legally binding even if the kid is the result of cheating.
 
Henrin said:
Just because the law takes money from him and he has no say on how it is spent doesn't mean its not his concern. Frankly, if I was to support a child support system by the state(in which I don't) it would have go towards the child and set up in a way where the mother can not use it for anything else. Not sure how that work, but that is how it should be.
Click to expand...
and your inability to define how such a system would work is the same problem the government has
 
Ben K. said:
From my reading of the article it just says he was aware of the affairs at some point before the results came back. Is it specified that he knew for a significant period of time or just something that came out in the course of a messy breakup and thus prompted the test?
Click to expand...

I could be wrong, but it was my understanding that he knew about his wife's affairs early in the marriage and paternity only became an issue during the divorce.
 
justabubba said:
and your inability to define how such a system would work is the same problem the government has
Click to expand...

Then they shouldn't have a child support system.
 
Muhammed said:
"Child support" is a very misleading term here.

The money does NOT go to the children, it goes to the mother who will spend it any way she wants to. Like buy heroin or whatever.
Click to expand...

Here in Ohio, the money is paid to the court, who then disburses to the mother. They can oversee how the money is spent, to some degree, and will hear any challenge made to her use of the money. She could have her children taken from her if they are not being taken care of. It's not perfect, but it's the best they have come up with so far.

And some children would spend the money on games, etc, not food, so it's probably best that it doesn't go directly to the children.
 
Henrin said:
Then they shouldn't have a child support system.
Click to expand...

they do
it's administered thru the custodial parents

it is a terribly flawed system, not unlike sending welfare checks to layabout parents of kids in a single-parent household and hoping the kids receive enough of it to maintain their welfare
but unfortunately, it is better than any other system yet devised
 
polgara said:
Here in Ohio, the money is paid to the court, who then disburses to the mother.
Click to expand...
Wrong.

You don't know WTF you're talking about.

They can oversee how the money is spent, to some degree, and will hear any challenge made to her use of the money.
Click to expand...

Wrong again.
 
Muhammed said:
Wrong.

You don't know WTF you're talking about.
Click to expand...


Are you sure you do?

If you have been ordered to pay by an income withholding where support is deducted directly from your paycheck or bank account, you must still pay through the Ohio Child Support Payment Central until the support is deducted from your wages or your account. Most deductions take two to three weeks to begin after the support order is finalized. Do not make support payments directly to the custodial parent. Ohio Law deems direct payments a gift. For your convenience, the Crawford County CSEA offers several options for making and receiving child support payments.

Child Support Payments
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
justabubba said:
they do
it's administered thru the custodial parents

it is a terribly flawed system, not unlike sending welfare checks to layabout parents of kids in a single-parent household and hoping the kids receive enough of it to maintain their welfare
but unfortunately, it is better than any other system yet devised
Click to expand...

Of course, I don't support welfare either. :2razz:
 
Viktyr Gehrig said:
Dad must pay child support for 3 kids that aren't his: Court rules | Canada | News | Toronto Sun

I have absolutely no sympathy for this man. Married for sixteen years, raising four children for over a decade-- and he demands a paternity test when he gets a divorce? I think about the message that sends his children and all I can think is "**** this guy". And I reject the notion that, again, after a decade of raising three children that he is anything but their real father.
Click to expand...

Guess you missed the part where his ex wife told him the children weren't his after the fact. I'd demand a paternity test too, and have nothing to do with them if discovered they weren't mine. If the mother wants child support, she can go find the real fathers.
 
He might have grounds for a fraud case against the mother. As the biological parent of those 3 daughters she should be responsible for finding the fathers of each and going through the legal motions of finding them support. Her actions---her children---her responsibility.

Just because the husband in this case accepted the responsibility of caring for those children under false pretenses (that they were biologically his), doesnt mean the responsibility remains his after the true facts of her marital fraud were discovered.

Its not a matter of him shirking responsibility for the care of "his" daughters, its a matter of her lies misrepresenting whose they were. In this case the state looks like an interested party due to possibly incuring welfare costs. The final decision appears biased to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom