Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Child support law leaves man a default dad
Tulsa World ^ | October 13, 2008 | Jarrel Wade

Posted on 10/14/2008 4:39:29 AM PDT by RogerFGay

Brande Samuels, 29, shows some
of the child support documents from
the Oklahoma Department of Human
Services. Samuels has been forced by
the state to pay child support for a
child but DNA tests show he is not the
father. SHERRY BROWN /
Tulsa World Friday


He promised himself and his family that when he left his prison cell, he would work hard to build a stable and positive life. After two years in prison, he was released early on good behavior and worked for less than minimum wage while he trained to become a welder. But that's when he first got notice from the Oklahoma Department of Human Services' Child Support Enforcement Division that he owed child support, he said.

Now, Samuels owes about $13,000 in back child support, he lives with his ailing grandfather and DHS seizes portions of his wages every month. "The last four years have been the worst in my life," Samuels said about life since leaving prison in 2004. "I went into so much debt." Samuels said under other circumstances he would take full responsibility for the child as a father should.

But he is not the father.


0.00 percent chance

Samuels was aware of the possibility that he might be the father during the pregnancy, he said. But the mother had been in another relationship at the same time.

"She wouldn't even allow me to sign the birth certificate," he said.

Two months later, the mother — Nadia Smith — put his name down as the father when she filed for child support, which Samuels wouldn't learn about until after his Oklahoma prison sentence, he said.

"They make (the mother) give up a name for the potential father. If she doesn't give up a name, then she can't get any assistance," Samuels said about the process to receive child support.

Jeff Wagner, spokesman for DHS, said when a mother is opening a child support case, she names the alleged father and provides "a great deal of information" in the Mother's Affidavit of Paternity.

In 2004, when Samuels left prison and learned of his obligation to DHS, case workers told Samuels if he wanted to fight the original order and get a hearing, he needed a lawyer, he said.

"I just want to be heard," he said. "The court was made for justice. It was made to help make the right decision."

Samuels did not have enough money to pay a lawyer, and no one would take his case for free, so in 2006, he approached Neighbor for Neighbor, a Tulsa nonprofit organization. They helped him prepare papers to require the mother to provide the child for a DNA test.

He found out then that the mother had left the state and had to be tracked down. She had left Oklahoma for Texas, Texas for Iowa, and then Iowa for Mississippi between 2004 and 2007, he said.

Neighbor for Neighbor helped Samuels track her through the courts and filed court papers seeking a DNA test from the child in March 2007, according to court records.

Two months later, Samuels received DNA evidence that the child support had been based on a false assumption. He was not the father — 0.00 percent chance.

"I was hurt. I was actually hurt because they put me through all this stuff without the child even being mine," he said.

After his three years of work, he believed he would be forgiven all his debt for the child, he said.

But it wasn't forgiven, and according to Oklahoma law, it won't be forgiven.


Default fatherhood

In child support cases, the burden of proof is on the alleged father — the accused — according to Oklahoma statutes.

An alleged father must appear at a child support hearing to request a paternity test. If he does not appear, he is legally designated as the father and child support is established in most cases.

Once designated as the father, that person is financially responsible for the child until he or she is 18 or adopted with a few stipulations for petitions which may vacate the original order, according to Oklahoma statutes.

DHS records show that Samuels was served papers to appear for his child support hearing in 2001, but Samuels said he was working in Texas at the time and could not have received the notice.

Wagner said by Oklahoma law someone can be legally served if the subpoena is put into the hands of someone 15 or older who lives at the same residence as the person.

But Samuels said the documents never touched his hands.

Regardless of the outcome of the DNA test, which Samuels spent three years trying to get, it was already too late.

Samuels was ruled the default father in 2001, and legally, DNA has no bearing.

"If you got me on default, you should still have to prove that I'm the father," he said.

This is the second recent story in the media of a default father being forced to pay child support in a bureaucratic nightmare with DHS.

The first, reported by The Oklahoman, was about Micheal Thomas of Tulsa, who had shown that he had never even met the mother and that he had DNA evidence that showed he wasn't the father. Still, he became a default father after missing his initial court hearing.

DHS does not keep statistics on the number of established fathers or default fathers who are not genetically related to the child they are responsible for, Wagner said.

In the eyes of the law and DHS, once paternity is established, there is no difference.

DHS officials would not comment on whether any changes have been made in establishing paternity since the Micheal Thomas case was reported.


Paternity figures

Between April 1, 2007, and March 31, the state Department of Human Services established paternity of 20,452 children in Oklahoma —of those cases, 5,208 were forced through court order, according to DHS Child Support Enforcement Division records.

In the same time period, there were 3,127 paternity tests conducted in DHS cases. Of those, 781 of the alleged fathers were found not to be the genetic father and were released from the case.


Jarrel Wade 581-8310
jarrel.wade@tulsaworld.com



TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Oklahoma
KEYWORDS: childsupport; custody; paternity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-235 next last

1 posted on 10/14/2008 4:39:30 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JimKalb; Free the USA; EdReform; realwoman; Orangedog; Lorianne; Outlaw76; balrog666; DNA Rules; ...

ping


2 posted on 10/14/2008 4:40:27 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: No.6

ping


3 posted on 10/14/2008 4:42:37 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

Aren’t you the guy who moved to Sweden to avoid child support payments?


4 posted on 10/14/2008 4:46:40 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

No.


5 posted on 10/14/2008 4:47:12 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
Aren’t you the guy who moved to Sweden to avoid child support payments?

No. And you've asked that before. So, now we know you're one of the women trying to protect corruption by making false accusations. And it's obvious why you're on the low road. There is no credible defense of the corruption.
6 posted on 10/14/2008 4:49:03 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

Ah America.
Land of the Free, Home of the Brave.
Sorry scratch that.
Ah America.
Land of the NOt So Free, Home of the Incompetant and Corrupt Government.


7 posted on 10/14/2008 4:53:03 AM PDT by SECURE AMERICA (Vote FOR AMERICA . Vote McCain / Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
Wagner said by Oklahoma law someone can be legally served if the subpoena is put into the hands of someone 15 or older who lives at the same residence as the person.

Clearly the first thing to do then is to request the affidavit of service.

This seems like a pretty low threshold for serving documents, considering that child support payments could be some $100,000 over 18 years. This isn't a small claims court case.

8 posted on 10/14/2008 4:53:04 AM PDT by ikka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
No, I am a man who shoulders his responsibilities not one who quits the best country on the planet to avoid them.

How are things in the ex-pat community in Sweden?

9 posted on 10/14/2008 4:53:55 AM PDT by wtc911 ("How you gonna get back down that hill?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

This is just one of the many benefits of replacing private morality with government mandates.


10 posted on 10/14/2008 4:54:32 AM PDT by Bertram3 ("Never give up. Never Give up. Never, never, never, never." Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SECURE AMERICA

It is corruption. The federal child support enforcement program is a pork-barrel program that pays-out in proportion to collections. So, states stopped caring about anything that might even vaguely resemble justice of any kind and changed their laws to maximize pork.


11 posted on 10/14/2008 4:55:02 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

Who said slavery was dead?


12 posted on 10/14/2008 4:55:15 AM PDT by TenthAmendmentChampion (Lord please bless our nation with John McCain as president and Sarah Palin as Vice President! Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ikka

It is corruption. The federal child support enforcement program is a pork-barrel program that pays-out in proportion to collections. So, states stopped caring about anything that might even vaguely resemble justice of any kind and changed their laws to maximize pork. Civil rights have been eliminated to that end.


13 posted on 10/14/2008 4:56:33 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Bertram3

It is corruption. The federal child support enforcement program is a pork-barrel program that pays-out in proportion to collections. So, states stopped caring about anything that might even vaguely resemble justice of any kind and changed their laws to maximize pork.


14 posted on 10/14/2008 4:57:08 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

It is corruption. The federal child support enforcement program is a pork-barrel program that pays-out in proportion to collections. So, states stopped caring about anything that might even vaguely resemble justice of any kind and changed their laws to maximize pork.


15 posted on 10/14/2008 4:57:29 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TenthAmendmentChampion

It is corruption. The federal child support enforcement program is a pork-barrel program that pays-out in proportion to collections. So, states stopped caring about anything that might even vaguely resemble justice of any kind and changed their laws to maximize pork.


16 posted on 10/14/2008 4:57:49 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay

He should start suing for custody of the child.

This farce of a law exists in California too. I can’t believe Oklahoma has this on its books, though.


17 posted on 10/14/2008 4:58:02 AM PDT by TenthAmendmentChampion (Lord please bless our nation with John McCain as president and Sarah Palin as Vice President! Amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

Are you pushing the same-sex marriage agenda?


18 posted on 10/14/2008 4:58:19 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: TenthAmendmentChampion

All states are doing this stuff all the time. It’s to maximize the federal pork.


19 posted on 10/14/2008 4:59:16 AM PDT by RogerFGay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RogerFGay
Under Arkansas law, if a negative DNA result is obtained, all unpaid child support is waived. Needless to say, paid child support is not returned.

It is not clear how Oklahoma could have obtained a default child support order against someone in prison. The order should be void.

20 posted on 10/14/2008 4:59:57 AM PDT by DeaconBenjamin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 221-235 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson