• 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!

Paternity Fraud

Bodi

Bodi

Just waiting for my set...
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 29, 2007
Messages
123,376
Reaction score
27,890
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
[FONT=&quot]One of the most significant, seldom-mentioned scandals in society concerns paternity fraud. Somewhere between 10% and 30% of children born in the U.S., and perhaps all of the Western world, are not the biological progeny of the presumed father. Paternity fraud is a disservice not only to alleged fathers, but also to the children involved.


[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]http://www.mensdefense.org/STM_Book/PaternityFraud.htm

OMG! Even if we say 5% of children are not biologically the man's child then that means that 1 in 20 children in the USA are the result of the wife/mother CHEATING? Holy ****... and they say it could actually be as high as 6 out of 20 children!!

My gosh... then these women go and get child support payments and the courts back them up.

[FONT=&quot]Carnell Smith of Atlanta Georgia was fraudulently led to believe he was father of his then-girlfriend’s child. He supported this child emotionally and financially for eleven years until a DNA test proved he was not the father. Smith appealed his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 10, 2002, those worthies announced refusal to hear the case, demonstrating typical judicial indifference to the rights of men (more on Smith in Part III).

More recently, a Missouri Appellate court ruled that Richard Carter of Kansas City, proven not to be the father of a 13-year-old, must pay support anyway. In late November ‘05 an appeals court upheld the Florida decision rejecting Richard Parker’s claim for relief from child support after a DNA test proved the child he supported for 7 years was not his.

Gulf War veteran Taron James, with the help of NCFM attorney Marc Angelucci, has been fighting a paternity fraud case in California regarding a child proven to be not his.[/FONT]
 
Bodhisattva said:
One of the most significant, seldom-mentioned scandals in society concerns paternity fraud. Somewhere between 10% and 30% of children born in the U.S., and perhaps all of the Western world, are not the biological progeny of the presumed father. Paternity fraud is a disservice not only to alleged fathers, but also to the children involved.
Click to expand...
I think I read it was about 10% way back in the late 1940's, described in the classic "Kinsey Report".
I agree that the real fathers should be tracked down and made to pay.
HOWEVER, we also need to be aware that ordinary DNA tests can be fooled by something known as "chimerism". Check out the Lydia Fairchild case, whose ovaries had different genetics from her blood, and almost lost custody of her own children because standard DNA tests said the kids weren't hers. That sort of thing is perfectly possible for men's gonads and blood, too!
 
Last edited:
Bodhisattva said:
[FONT="]One of the most significant, seldom-mentioned scandals in society concerns paternity fraud. Somewhere between 10% and 30% of children born in the U.S., and perhaps all of the Western world, are not the biological progeny of the presumed father. Paternity fraud is a disservice not only to alleged fathers, but also to the children involved.


[/FONT][/COLOR][/I][COLOR=#000000][FONT="][/FONT]http://www.mensdefense.org/STM_Book/PaternityFraud.htm

OMG! Even if we say 5% of children are not biologically the man's child then that means that 1 in 20 children in the USA are the result of the wife/mother CHEATING? Holy ****... and they say it could actually be as high as 6 out of 20 children!!

My gosh... then these women go and get child support payments and the courts back them up.

[FONT="]Carnell Smith of Atlanta Georgia was fraudulently led to believe he was father of his then-girlfriend’s child. He supported this child emotionally and financially for eleven years until a DNA test proved he was not the father. Smith appealed his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 10, 2002, those worthies announced refusal to hear the case, demonstrating typical judicial indifference to the rights of men (more on Smith in Part III).

More recently, a Missouri Appellate court ruled that Richard Carter of Kansas City, proven not to be the father of a 13-year-old, must pay support anyway. In late November ‘05 an appeals court upheld the Florida decision rejecting Richard Parker’s claim for relief from child support after a DNA test proved the child he supported for 7 years was not his.

Gulf War veteran Taron James, with the help of NCFM attorney Marc Angelucci, has been fighting a paternity fraud case in California regarding a child proven to be not his.[/FONT]
Click to expand...


As with a lot of important things you will find that the numbers are all over the place, because I argue on the whole we dont want to know.
 
Don't they do DNA tests now before ordering a man to pay child support? It used to be that they could not prove a man was the father, only that he either *could* be or could not be. Now, with DNA testing, they can prove he is or isn't the father.

Those men who are found to be not the father after paying support should be released from any obligation to pay, and they should be reimbursed for the support they paid.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Don't they do DNA tests now before ordering a man to pay child support? It used to be that they could not prove a man was the father, only that he either *could* be or could not be. Now, with DNA testing, they can prove he is or isn't the father.

Those men who are found to be not the father after paying support should be released from any obligation to pay, and they should be reimbursed for the support they paid.
Click to expand...

Depends on state law. In several if a man says that the kid is his then its his. If he then has suspicion that its not his he has to fight to prove he is not the father. The mother can drag that out a while. And even when its proven that the kid is not his she will likely not be forced to pay the support back because it could put the kid through hardships.
 
Bodhisattva said:
[FONT="]One of the most significant, seldom-mentioned scandals in society concerns paternity fraud. Somewhere between 10% and 30% of children born in the U.S., and perhaps all of the Western world, are not the biological progeny of the presumed father. Paternity fraud is a disservice not only to alleged fathers, but also to the children involved.


[/FONT][/COLOR][/I][COLOR=#000000][FONT="][/FONT]http://www.mensdefense.org/STM_Book/PaternityFraud.htm

OMG! Even if we say 5% of children are not biologically the man's child then that means that 1 in 20 children in the USA are the result of the wife/mother CHEATING? Holy ****... and they say it could actually be as high as 6 out of 20 children!!

My gosh... then these women go and get child support payments and the courts back them up.

[FONT="]Carnell Smith of Atlanta Georgia was fraudulently led to believe he was father of his then-girlfriend’s child. He supported this child emotionally and financially for eleven years until a DNA test proved he was not the father. Smith appealed his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 10, 2002, those worthies announced refusal to hear the case, demonstrating typical judicial indifference to the rights of men (more on Smith in Part III).

More recently, a Missouri Appellate court ruled that Richard Carter of Kansas City, proven not to be the father of a 13-year-old, must pay support anyway. In late November ‘05 an appeals court upheld the Florida decision rejecting Richard Parker’s claim for relief from child support after a DNA test proved the child he supported for 7 years was not his.

Gulf War veteran Taron James, with the help of NCFM attorney Marc Angelucci, has been fighting a paternity fraud case in California regarding a child proven to be not his.[/FONT]
Click to expand...


She should be charged with fraud.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Don't they do DNA tests now before ordering a man to pay child support? It used to be that they could not prove a man was the father, only that he either *could* be or could not be. Now, with DNA testing, they can prove he is or isn't the father.

Those men who are found to be not the father after paying support should be released from any obligation to pay, and they should be reimbursed for the support they paid.
Click to expand...

If I was a guy. I would ask for DNA before I got fully invested (emotionally and financially)

If a woman knowingly pinned paternity on the wrong person - I am not sure what the penalty should be, but it should be harsh.

If I was a woman who had multiple partners and was pregnant....I would want to know who the real father is.
 
Bodhisattva said:
[FONT="]One of the most significant, seldom-mentioned scandals in society concerns paternity fraud. Somewhere between 10% and 30% of children born in the U.S., and perhaps all of the Western world, are not the biological progeny of the presumed father. Paternity fraud is a disservice not only to alleged fathers, but also to the children involved.


[/FONT][/COLOR][/I][COLOR=#000000][FONT="][/FONT]http://www.mensdefense.org/STM_Book/PaternityFraud.htm

OMG! Even if we say 5% of children are not biologically the man's child then that means that 1 in 20 children in the USA are the result of the wife/mother CHEATING? Holy ****... and they say it could actually be as high as 6 out of 20 children!!

My gosh... then these women go and get child support payments and the courts back them up.

[FONT="]Carnell Smith of Atlanta Georgia was fraudulently led to believe he was father of his then-girlfriend’s child. He supported this child emotionally and financially for eleven years until a DNA test proved he was not the father. Smith appealed his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 10, 2002, those worthies announced refusal to hear the case, demonstrating typical judicial indifference to the rights of men (more on Smith in Part III).

More recently, a Missouri Appellate court ruled that Richard Carter of Kansas City, proven not to be the father of a 13-year-old, must pay support anyway. In late November ‘05 an appeals court upheld the Florida decision rejecting Richard Parker’s claim for relief from child support after a DNA test proved the child he supported for 7 years was not his.

Gulf War veteran Taron James, with the help of NCFM attorney Marc Angelucci, has been fighting a paternity fraud case in California regarding a child proven to be not his.[/FONT]
Click to expand...


This is not exactly new. I'm not sure I'd call it fraud though. It's just...life.

There's a reason people used to insist all brides were virgins and then kept them locked up in the castle, guarded by eunuchs. Duh.
 
Thumper said:
Depends on state law. In several if a man says that the kid is his then its his. If he then has suspicion that its not his he has to fight to prove he is not the father. The mother can drag that out a while. And even when its proven that the kid is not his she will likely not be forced to pay the support back because it could put the kid through hardships.
Click to expand...

Or he will have to continue paying so the woman and kid can maintain the same standard of living because the reasoning is that if what is currently happening for the kid is good status quo remains.
 
Thumper said:
Depends on state law. In several if a man says that the kid is his then its his. If he then has suspicion that its not his he has to fight to prove he is not the father.
Click to expand...

Perhaps he shouldn't be saying it's his until a DNA test confirms it. Though he should be released from support obligations as soon as it's proven it isn't his.
 
The more I think about it the less I'm opposed to men asking for a DNA test after a child is born. It's probably the best thing men can do given the situation.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Don't they do DNA tests now before ordering a man to pay child support? It used to be that they could not prove a man was the father, only that he either *could* be or could not be. Now, with DNA testing, they can prove he is or isn't the father.

Those men who are found to be not the father after paying support should be released from any obligation to pay, and they should be reimbursed for the support they paid.
Click to expand...

Most states have restrictions on this.

some are 1 month or 2 months after the baby is born or you are served with child support papers.
others you can be put down as the father and to bad so sad.

usually once payments start and a judgement is in place it is almost impossible to get overturned.
 
Scrabaholic said:
Perhaps he shouldn't be saying it's his until a DNA test confirms it. Though he should be released from support obligations as soon as it's proven it isn't his.
Click to expand...

What married man gets a paternity test when their wife gets pregnant?
 
Scrabaholic said:
I think that one should be done before a support order is made.
Click to expand...

I agree but by then most courts say, "so what? You have been paying for the kid all these years and the status quo is what is best for the kid so you sir, keep paying".
 
Bodhisattva said:
I agree but by then most courts say, "so what? You have been paying for the kid all these years and the status quo is what is best for the kid so you sir, keep paying".
Click to expand...

Exactly as it should be. Not the courts fault the man was duped into being a father to someone else's kid.

 
Bodhisattva said:
Or he will have to continue paying so the woman and kid can maintain the same standard of living because the reasoning is that if what is currently happening for the kid is good status quo remains.
Click to expand...

And in your mind that is a bad thing? People adopt children all the time and raise them as their own. It makes sense to make the child's welfare #1 at all times.
 
Look, that rate has been consistent throughout all of human history and across all human cultures. If you are a man, you know that this is a possibility, and you know there's not a goddamned thing you can do about it. If you are that obsessed with only investing your precious time and money in your own genetic offspring, insist on the paternity test at birth and inform your partner up-front that you will be doing so. (Hopefully, she has the good sense not to sleep with you at this point.) If you don't have the child tested immediately, and you let the child have your name, and you let the child believe that you are her father-- you are her father, now and forever, and you have absolutely no right to abandon her because of something she had no control over. If you would turn your back on a child because of something her mother did, you don't deserve to have a woman, you don't deserve to have children, and you don't deserve to be treated like a man in society.

The fact that men are forced to pay for children they don't want, and had no say in creating, is a problem. The fact that men are forced to pay for children they decided they don't want anymore is the child support system functioning as intended.
 
Korimyr the Rat said:
Look, that rate has been consistent throughout all of human history and across all human cultures. If you are a man, you know that this is a possibility, and you know there's not a goddamned thing you can do about it. If you are that obsessed with only investing your precious time and money in your own genetic offspring, insist on the paternity test at birth and inform your partner up-front that you will be doing so. (Hopefully, she has the good sense not to sleep with you at this point.) If you don't have the child tested immediately, and you let the child have your name, and you let the child believe that you are her father-- you are her father, now and forever, and you have absolutely no right to abandon her because of something she had no control over. If you would turn your back on a child because of something her mother did, you don't deserve to have a woman, you don't deserve to have children, and you don't deserve to be treated like a man in society.

The fact that men are forced to pay for children they don't want, and had no say in creating, is a problem. The fact that men are forced to pay for children they decided they don't want anymore is the child support system functioning as intended.
Click to expand...

I see. Is there a reason a woman shouldn't sleep with a man that would want to know for sure if a child is his? Why should the man just assume that a child is his when there is a good chance it's not? I understand the idea that it suggests he doesn't trust her, but well, look at those percentages in the OP and you will notice that it's not unreasonable to wonder if it is indeed his.
 
Bodhisattva said:
[FONT="]One of the most significant, seldom-mentioned scandals in society concerns paternity fraud. Somewhere between 10% and 30% of children born in the U.S., and perhaps all of the Western world, are not the biological progeny of the presumed father. Paternity fraud is a disservice not only to alleged fathers, but also to the children involved.


[/FONT][/COLOR][/I][COLOR=#000000][FONT="][/FONT]http://www.mensdefense.org/STM_Book/PaternityFraud.htm

OMG! Even if we say 5% of children are not biologically the man's child then that means that 1 in 20 children in the USA are the result of the wife/mother CHEATING? Holy ****... and they say it could actually be as high as 6 out of 20 children!!

My gosh... then these women go and get child support payments and the courts back them up.

[FONT="]Carnell Smith of Atlanta Georgia was fraudulently led to believe he was father of his then-girlfriend’s child. He supported this child emotionally and financially for eleven years until a DNA test proved he was not the father. Smith appealed his case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 10, 2002, those worthies announced refusal to hear the case, demonstrating typical judicial indifference to the rights of men (more on Smith in Part III).

More recently, a Missouri Appellate court ruled that Richard Carter of Kansas City, proven not to be the father of a 13-year-old, must pay support anyway. In late November ‘05 an appeals court upheld the Florida decision rejecting Richard Parker’s claim for relief from child support after a DNA test proved the child he supported for 7 years was not his.

Gulf War veteran Taron James, with the help of NCFM attorney Marc Angelucci, has been fighting a paternity fraud case in California regarding a child proven to be not his.[/FONT]
Click to expand...


Unless he adopted the child, to force a man to pay child support for a child that is not his own is just wrong. Now that there is means of checking DNA to determine that, we should be pushing for a law protecting men from predatory women in that regard.
 
Winchester said:
Exactly as it should be. Not the courts fault the man was duped into being a father to someone else's kid.

Click to expand...


So you argue that every man should get a DNA test when he is told he is a father?
 
AlbqOwl said:
Unless he adopted the child, to force a man to pay child support for a child that is not his own is just wrong. Now that there is means of checking DNA to determine that, we should be pushing for a law protecting men from predatory women in that regard.
Click to expand...

Why do the courts continue to make men pay for kids that DNA shows is not their kid though?

The court argues because it is in the best interest of the child to continue the status quo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom