• 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!

Man paying child support

Bodhisattva said:
In this case he already 100% knows that the girl is not his biological daughter rand presented that evidence to the Court... which DID NOT CARE.
Click to expand...

The court followed the letter of the law. Men only have two years to challenge paternity in that (and many other states) in many states he has established paternity if he simply says his girlfriend is having his baby.
 
Bodhisattva said:
A man is paying child support for a child he eventually found out was not his... he was fine with that. Loves "his child". What is unbelievable is that the man is now being forced to pay child support for the kid now that the mother is re-marrying the man that she cheated on him with, the child's natural father. He is being forced to pay for an intact family!

How DNA Testing Is Changing Fatherhood - The New York Times
Click to expand...

I started a thread about idiot men getting taken for a ride at the strip clubs. Same principle applies here. Men often think with the wrong head, and them thinking with it often results in those men doing really stupid things.
 
Thumper said:
Most states family law is written that way.
Click to expand...

Most states are not common law marriage states. If we are talking about states that declare that it doesn't matter if a man is the father or not because he acted as one for X amount of years, then yes, it would seem so.
 
Henrin said:
Most states are not common law marriage states. If we are talking about states that declare that it doesn't matter if a man is the father or not because he acted as one for X amount of years, then yes, it would seem so.
Click to expand...

Even when there is no common law marriage, in several states, if the guy tells others (who are willing to testify in court) that his Girlfriend is having his kid he will be forced to pay childsupport until he is able to prove that he is not the father. Women can delay that opertunity a good while. And then after he is proven to not be the father she will not be forced to pay that support back.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I know in my case I pay child support. That is fine. I love my kids. She won't get a job, never has since we divorced, so I kinda get overly screwed paying more so she can go to yoga, plant flowers and do art all day at her house. Whatever. My fault, I never should have married her but I did.

What kinda sucks, although I know I still need to pay, is that she has since married a CEO and a literal multi-millionaire. I kinda barely get by renting a small place and she has two million dollar homes now, drives a leased Mercedes, etc. Whatever. That is fine but what sucks is that they don't need my money at their house for the girls but I could REALLY use that money at my house for the girls. I could save to buy a house perhaps. She doesn't care. I know... my bad. I am screwed. She has every right to not care and she has the sexist courts back up what is essentially a scam to screw men over.

Anyway... that is my rant.
Click to expand...

If she married a multimillionare, you are paying to support your kids, not alimony. Sounds like she would be going to yoga, planting flowers, and driving a Mercedes with or without your money.;)

That being said....I am all over the need to have more realistic child support and custody arrangements.:peace
 
Bodhisattva said:
In this case he already 100% knows that the girl is not his biological daughter rand presented that evidence to the Court... which DID NOT CARE.
Click to expand...

Didn't he put his name on the birth certificate though? Or was it just that he married her? THAT would be grossly unfair.
 
year2late said:
If she married a multimillionare, you are paying to support your kids, not alimony. Sounds like she would be going to yoga, planting flowers, and driving a Mercedes with or without your money.;)

That being said....I am all over the need to have more realistic child support and custody arrangements.:peace
Click to expand...

I know you are.

It was essentially alimony until she got married. She even went on welfare rather than work. I knowzit is also child support but if the courts actually cared about the children they would allow less from me to her so i could better their lives at my house. I know this makes sense to you. ;)
 
MaggieD said:
Didn't he put his name on the birth certificate though? Or was it just that he married her? THAT would be grossly unfair.
Click to expand...

Not sure. I think his name is on the B.C.

She admits she cheated and the kid is not his though.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Not sure. I think his name is on the B.C.

She admits she cheated and the kid is not his though.
Click to expand...

I think some states' laws say if the child is born in the marriage, the husband is presumed the father. And, of course, if he signed the BC, he was probably toast.

You post about these circumstances sort of frequently. Now I understand why, and I'm also beginning to understand there's quite a bit of unfairness out there.
 
MaggieD said:
I think some states' laws say if the child is born in the marriage, the husband is presumed the father. And, of course, if he signed the BC, he was probably toast.

You post about these circumstances sort of frequently. Now I understand why, and I'm also beginning to understand there's quite a bit of unfairness out there.
Click to expand...

So basically men should avoid signing birth certificates because the state might **** them over if they do. Good to know.
 
MaggieD said:
I think some states' laws say if the child is born in the marriage, the husband is presumed the father. And, of course, if he signed the BC, he was probably toast.

You post about these circumstances sort of frequently. Now I understand why, and I'm also beginning to understand there's quite a bit of unfairness out there.
Click to expand...

That is all. I am an advocate of equal rights in the Court System. Men get screwed. I help them here when I can about Court rules, rulings, procedures, testimony, evidence and affidavits.

Again in




I understand but courts care about the woman and child then almost as an afterthought the man.
 
MaggieD said:
Sure you can. But that doesn't change your obligations to pay child support if your girlfriend has a child... not one little iota.
Click to expand...

Well, it's pretty great that I'm not a ****ing retard that had children with a crazy woman.
 
Bodhisattva said:
That is all. I am an advocate of equal rights in the Court System. Men get screwed. I help them here when I can about Court rules, rulings, procedures, testimony, evidence and affidavits.

Again in




I understand but courts care about the woman and child then almost as an afterthought the man.
Click to expand...

Man? Are you telling me that isn't a wad of cash? Interesting...
 
Henrin said:
So basically men should avoid signing birth certificates because the state might **** them over if they do. Good to know.
Click to expand...

It's important that all of us know our rights and responsibilities which vary from state to state. Making a mistake like this guy did can ruin a person's life. I guess I'm saying, if I were a guy, and I knew, as this guy did, that I wasn't the dad, I'd probably have spoken to an attorney about how to protect myself.

And in case you think, "Yeah, sure you would," I've been with Tom for 17 years. Two weeks after I met him, I asked for his SS number and ran a background check on him with his consent. Before he moved in, I made an appointment with my atty to make sure I could get him out fairly easily if I so chose. And to make sure IL wasn't a common law state. I'm a takin' care of business kinda gal. So I'm assuming if I was a guy I'd be the same way.
 
Bodhisattva said:
A man is paying child support for a child he eventually found out was not his... he was fine with that. Loves "his child". What is unbelievable is that the man is now being forced to pay child support for the kid now that the mother is re-marrying the man that she cheated on him with, the child's natural father. He is being forced to pay for an intact family!
Click to expand...
That’s clearly a complex situation that the law isn’t really designed to address. Mike somewhat painted himself in to a corner by originally signing a document saying he was the natural father even when he knew he wasn’t (possibly based on some poor legal advice) and there is an argument that if he wanted to retain the rights of a father, he had to take on the responsibilities too. It seems the law does have the scope to account for the situation and the main problem is how slow and expensive a process it can be – something that is far from unique to this area.

In general terms I think there can sometimes be too much focus on the financial situation of the father and not enough on the wellbeing of the children (financial and otherwise) which these laws are designed to protect and I fear some of the pressure for change may well improve the situation for some fathers, it could also make it worse for some children too.
 
MaggieD said:
What a tragedy. If I were a man, I think I might be tempted to have a paternity test taken married or not married. The angst that guy is going through is very likely going to color his whole life. I'm afraid that's my answer... paternity test every time. That's the world we live in. It's that old saying again -- trust but verify...
Click to expand...
I have come to conclude that paternity tests should be legally mandatory, even with married couples. And I say legally mandated so that the women don't use the emotional blackmail of, "Don't you trust me?"

"Sorry, babe, it's not me, it's the law. :shrug:"
 
MaggieD said:
Didn't he put his name on the birth certificate though? Or was it just that he married her? THAT would be grossly unfair.
Click to expand...
In most states, there is a legal presumption of paternity in legal marriages (not common law marriages, as you point out previously are not much recognized anymore). This legal presumption disqualifies men from contesting paternity.
 
radcen said:
In most states, there is a legal presumption of paternity in legal marriages (not common law marriages, as you point out previously are not much recognized anymore). This legal presumption disqualifies men from contesting paternity.
Click to expand...

Wow. If that's true, that's completely unfair.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom