DNA Evidence: Enough to Exonerate Dads?

CNSNews ^ | 4/11/02 | Dianna Thompson

[Osprey]

It's A$$H@!&$ like you, who have created this biased legal system against men.

[Wonder Warthog]

"I know I am going to be hatefully flamed by some men, but I have had a problem with men who disown children who are born withing the marriage who are not their bio kin. The children born within a marriage belong to the marriage and the parents legally have been through the ages, their marital mother and father."

What this proves conclusively is that you are an idiot. A married woman BETRAYS HER MARRIAGE VOWS (and contract), screws another man, gets pregnant, LIES to the man she is married to about the parentage of the child, and you think it is just fine?? GIVE ME A BREAK.

IF the HUSBAND of said woman, KNOWLINGLY ADOPTS the illegitimate child, THEN you have a point--in any other case, a rank injustice is being done to the innocent male involved.

To hell with the previous legal precedent--back then the tools to prove parentage with certainty didn't exist---now they do--and it is time to change the legal system to match todays knowledge. The legitimate course is to use the DNA evidence to FIND THE BIOLOGICAL FATHER and force HIM to pay child support.

[Lazamataz]

Even though DNA evidence has been used to free falsely convicted murderers, and individuals unfairly convicted of rape and other crimes, courts [do not] accept it as proof that a man should not have to pay child support.

Insanity.

In other words, welcome to American law.

[steve-b]

That child needs a father, and you, sir, are it.

***BBBZZZTTTTT!!!!*** Thank you for playing.

The correct answer, of course, is "the man who made half of the child is it".

[Tumbleweed_Connection]

CA is so Rat. Consider what the country could be if Rat policies were accepted.

[steve-b]

I am not saying that the woman has no responsibility.

Yes you are. We didn't let Clowntoon get away with hiding behind semantic evasions, and his were a thousand times more clever than yours.

[steve-b]

Because he's the grownup and the child is not.

You are (at least physically) a grownup. Therefore, you shall henceforth bear full responsibility for all children born out of wedlock. Fair is fair.

[Lazamataz]

I am aware of a situation where a man caught his wife in bed with another man when he arrived home unexpectedly fron a several month overseas engagement, and he filed immediately for divorce. Nine months later, a baby was born, yet the court held him responsible for child support for 18 years.

He should have considered himself lucky.

If she had filed for an order of protection, the courts would have also taken away all his firearms.

[steve-b]

A married woman BETRAYS HER MARRIAGE VOWS (and contract), screws another man, gets pregnant, LIES to the man she is married to about the parentage of the child, and you think it is just fine??

Welcome to Clinton World.

[mlmr]

No, that is stupid. People should take responsibility for the children born in their marriages.

[mlmr]

I thought that my position supported the fact that the family is the basic unit of the nation. The author of this article supports carving families to satisfy some higher biological imparitive.

[mlmr]

I dont deal with partners, I deal with the unequivicable moral fact that the child was born into the marriage with a legal mother and a legal father. Marriage is to be stronger than human stupididty and moral failings.

[mlmr]

Psycho Bunny, I love you but I am not joking. I see the exploded remnants of fatherless children every day in my work.

[steve-b]

People should take responsibility for the children born in their marriages.

Of course.

However, the children born in infidelity are the responsibility of the people who actually created them.

[steve-b]

I see the exploded remnants of fatherless children every day in my work.

You work on the West Bank?

[mlmr]

I understand what you are saying, I have said nothing about the wife's accountablity here, nor the accountability of the bio father. My premise is that the legal father has a legal and moral responsibility to the children born within his marriage. I am not saying other people are not responsible or wrong.

[CA Conservative]

sorry, but if you let a kid call you daddy for 10 years, you forfeit the right to start challenging paternity in my opinion.

The problem with this argument is that the father may not know until 10 years later that the child is not his... I agree, if the man knows the child is not his, and fails to challenge it, then he should be responsible. But I think the 10 year statute of limitations should start from the time the man becomes aware that the child may not be his. That is the way they do many other causes of action; the clock does not start until the victim becomes aware that they have been harmed.

[freeeee]

Marriage is to be stronger than human stupididty and moral failings.

Laws like this do nothing to strengthen marriage. They undermine its legitimacy by causing the marriage contract to be used as a tool for fraud and injustice.

Keep it up, and people just won't get married to begin with. Then what good will marriage be to anyone?

[mlmr]

I agree the law is blind. But there are many more cases where a child is raised in a family and years later turns out not to be a bio child. The marriage is the net that gives the child a family.

[Doctor Stochastic]

it's for The Children