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

Skip to comments.

Married man refuses to pay prostitute child support
Herald Sun ^ | 08/22/2009 | By Fiona Hudson

Posted on 08/24/2009 6:47:55 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd

* Man paid prostitute for sex
* She gave birth to his baby
* He is refusing to pay child support

A MAN who paid a woman for sex is resisting child support requests after the prostitute had his baby.

The married Melbourne man argues the child is potentially a breach of the Trade Practices Act.

He told a federal magistrate he shouldn't have to pay for the inadvertent offspring given the circumstances of the conception, the Herald Sun reports.

The accidental dad - who can be referred to only by the pseudonym Mr Lilley - told magistrate Grant Riethmuller he'd had "a consumer transaction" with the child's mother.

Mr Lilley argued an implied term of the "contract" between clients and sex workers was that women would take measures to avoid pregnancy.

Mr Lilley told the court he was not disputing paternity.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.com.au ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: childsupport; prostitution
This guy is so scre....

Well, you know.

1 posted on 08/24/2009 6:47:55 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Buried in the last line:

Sex without a condom is illegal in licensed Victorian brothels and escort agencies.

It would appear that both broke the law. When you ride a motorcycle without a helmet in many states, you waive your right to sue.

2 posted on 08/24/2009 6:52:33 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Are there any men left in Washington? Or, are there only cowards? Ahmad Shah Massoud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Umm... I’m certainly no expert when it comes to prostitutes but doesn’t the job usually entail haveing sex with numerous men? If that is the case how the heck would the prostitute know who fathered the child?


3 posted on 08/24/2009 6:52:42 AM PDT by isthisnickcool (GIVE ME YOUR MONEY BITCH! - President Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I hope the intercourse he got is worth the intercourse he’s getting.


4 posted on 08/24/2009 6:53:03 AM PDT by hometoroost (Torture? Would you rather do 5 years at Gitmo or 5 hours with the Muslims?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

Or perhaps they just broke the condom.


5 posted on 08/24/2009 6:54:00 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
illegal in licensed Victorian brothels and escort agencies.

clearly the goverment thought they had thought of everything.

Clearly they were wrong.

Oh, there's a message in here for libertarians, too.

6 posted on 08/24/2009 6:56:05 AM PDT by the invisib1e hand (this slope is getting slippereeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
a dirtball and a deadbeat.
7 posted on 08/24/2009 6:56:27 AM PDT by the invisib1e hand (this slope is getting slippereeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

“The married Melbourne man argues the child is potentially a breach of the Trade Practices Act.”

Now there’s a guy you want to be a father...what a pathetic excuse for a man. Can’t do the time, don’t do the crime.

Colonel, USAFR


8 posted on 08/24/2009 6:56:51 AM PDT by jagusafr (Kill the red lizard, Lord! - nod to C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Paying her in the first place was a mistake. Sets a bad precedent ...


9 posted on 08/24/2009 6:57:53 AM PDT by MetaThought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
Way to go. Personally I think child support should be considered unconstitutional under the 1973 ‘right to choose’ and ‘privacy’ ruling Roe vs Wade but the SCOTUS only considers sexual freedoms not property rights as protected.
10 posted on 08/24/2009 6:58:39 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Socialist Conservatives: "'Big government is free because tax cuts pay for it'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

This what happens when sex is made into a commodity to be bought and sold.


11 posted on 08/24/2009 6:58:49 AM PDT by Valpal1 (Always be prepared to make that difference.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
... ride a motorcycle without a helmet ...

There are, indeed, similarities.

12 posted on 08/24/2009 6:58:59 AM PDT by RobinOfKingston (Democrats, the party of evil. Republicans, the party of stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
Personally I think child support should be considered unconstitutional under the 1973 ‘right to choose’ and ‘privacy’ ruling Roe vs Wade

I'm assuming that you don't mean for this to refer to situations where an unmarried man and woman agree to have a child together when they have been cohabitating as though they were married - right?

13 posted on 08/24/2009 7:01:58 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

No Choice here bit to man up and pay if it is his kid in spite of the mothers profession.


14 posted on 08/24/2009 7:01:59 AM PDT by Cheetahcat (Zero the Wright kind of Racist! We are in a state of War with Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand
---Oh, there's a message in here for libertarians, too. --

--I'm a little slow this morning--what is that message?

15 posted on 08/24/2009 7:03:09 AM PDT by rellimpank (--don't believe anything the MSM tells you about firearms or explosives--NRA Benefactor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

At least one of them should have kept the exchange of goods and services “above the waist”.


16 posted on 08/24/2009 7:03:10 AM PDT by Albion Wilde ("A cultural problem cannot be solved with a political solution." -- Selwyn Duke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Frankly, the whore should consider this a “business expense!”


17 posted on 08/24/2009 7:03:21 AM PDT by Oldpuppymax (AGENDA OF THE LEFT EXPOSED)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Valpal1
This what happens when sex is made into a commodity to be bought and sold.

This and what happens in some divorce courts.

18 posted on 08/24/2009 7:03:28 AM PDT by Loud Mime (1. READ Ann Coulter's "Guilty" - - - 2. barastikas = Obama's logos)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

What an idiot! He is the father of this child. The child isn’t some business deal. Give me a break! He needs to take care of his child.


19 posted on 08/24/2009 7:07:42 AM PDT by Halls (Jesus is my Lord and Savior)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
When you ride a motorcycle without a helmet in many states, you waive your right to sue.

Waive your right to sue who?

Someone who blows a light and hits you -they are absolved of liability if you are not wearing a helmet?

20 posted on 08/24/2009 7:08:16 AM PDT by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oldpuppymax

This is a child, not a business deal. The sex was the business deal, the child is a human life, the most precious kind and deserves to be taken care of. Dad has to pay.


21 posted on 08/24/2009 7:11:08 AM PDT by Halls (Jesus is my Lord and Savior)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

That post just took the edge off my monday morning, thank you


22 posted on 08/24/2009 7:11:53 AM PDT by domenad (In all things, in all ways, at all times, let honor guide me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
RE :”I'm assuming that you don't mean for this to refer to situations where an unmarried man and woman agree to have a child together when they have been cohabitating as though they were married - right?

I see your point on that condition above. That one is a bit more difficult but in general child support should go to the child, and be regulated on the custodial parent's end. Right now it is just a windfall for women who want a baby or women who just get tired of a relationship. It should not be reward like it is now(privatized welfare) that the women can use to support the new boyfriend (is shown every day on judge TV shows.)

23 posted on 08/24/2009 7:12:57 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Socialist Conservatives: "'Big government is free because tax cuts pay for it'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hometoroost
"I hope the intercourse he got is worth the intercourse he’s getting."

"I'm getting a fine tootsy-frootsying right here ..."

24 posted on 08/24/2009 7:14:46 AM PDT by BlueLancer (I'm getting a fine tootsy-frootsying right here...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cheetahcat

No choice?

Why should you assume the man must pay? Is it beyond the realm of possibilities to think that maybe HE can be awarded custody, raise the child himself, and the prostitute be ordered to pay him child support?


25 posted on 08/24/2009 7:14:54 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I am Legend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

I hope the feller here has to pay, but who in God’s name thinks this is a fit mother? Best chance for the kiddo is a foster home IMHO.


26 posted on 08/24/2009 7:17:30 AM PDT by SeminoleSoldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cheetahcat
No Choice here bit to man up and pay if it is his kid in spite of the mothers profession.

I'm inclined to agree. After all, the money is really for the innocent kid, not to "punish" the father or "reward" the mother. And anytime anyone, male or female, has unprotected sex, they have to face the possibility that a pregnancy might result, and be prepared to take responsibility for it.

27 posted on 08/24/2009 7:18:01 AM PDT by Nea Wood (Silly liberal . . . paychecks are for workers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: domenad

Always happy to provide a service to a fellow FReeper.

Now pay me.

(lolol)


28 posted on 08/24/2009 7:18:11 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (I am Legend)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Yet another reason to avoid visiting prostitutes.


29 posted on 08/24/2009 7:25:29 AM PDT by BertWheeler (Dance and the world dances with you...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

Um... Condoms are not 100% effective... latex and lambskin do break and tear.


30 posted on 08/24/2009 7:25:54 AM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Unfit mother and unfit father. Kid goes to a foster home. Case closed.


31 posted on 08/24/2009 7:29:39 AM PDT by Shooter 2.5 (NRA /Patron - TSRA- IDPA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the invisib1e hand; Vigilanteman; rellimpank
The magistrate noted the door might be open for the dad to launch legal action against the owners of the brothel or escort service - or the mother individually - for damages.

All jobs have inherent risk, which the worker accepts as a condition of employment.

It seems to me that unless there was a prior notification of the customer that he assumed the risk of pregnancy or that the laws of the state put the responsibility on the customer then the customer would naturally assume that the risk of pregnancy would be bourn by the prostitute or the brothel.

A customer would naturally assume that part of the service he was paying for is the freedom from the risk of fathering an unwanted child.

32 posted on 08/24/2009 7:30:54 AM PDT by Pontiac (Your message here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

Somewhere in the world a guy is having some fun and we’re
to put a stop to it!


33 posted on 08/24/2009 7:34:32 AM PDT by Dr. Ursus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Ursus
Somewhere in the world a guy is having some fun and we’re to put a stop to it!

Bingo - the Fun Nanny Patrol is at High Alert!

Cant Have That!

34 posted on 08/24/2009 7:40:47 AM PDT by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: BlueLancer

He’s got a good mind to join a club and beat her over the head with it.


35 posted on 08/24/2009 7:44:06 AM PDT by hometoroost (Torture? Would you rather do 5 years at Gitmo or 5 hours with the Muslims?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

“the Trade Practices Act”

So, that’s what he was up to.


36 posted on 08/24/2009 7:47:31 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

“No choice?

Why should you assume the man must pay? Is it beyond the realm of possibilities to think that maybe HE can be awarded custody, raise the child himself, and the prostitute be ordered to pay him child support?”

Or maybe she would give up the kid so the natural father could raise it.


37 posted on 08/24/2009 7:50:29 AM PDT by Cheetahcat (Zero the Wright kind of Racist! We are in a state of War with Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Nea Wood

“I’m inclined to agree. After all, the money is really for the innocent kid, not to “punish” the father or “reward” the mother. And anytime anyone, male or female, has unprotected sex, they have to face the possibility that a pregnancy might result, and be prepared to take responsibility for it.”

Therein is the problem and the Child is caught Square in the middle of this,Even if she smelled money and set a trap.


38 posted on 08/24/2009 7:56:30 AM PDT by Cheetahcat (Zero the Wright kind of Racist! We are in a state of War with Democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

You might be overlooking the vast majority of child support situations, in which the children live most of the time with one parent, and the other parent pays child support to assist with their legitimate expenses. Why would the child support “go to the child” if the custodial parent is providing their food, shelter, health care, etc., etc. ?


39 posted on 08/24/2009 8:05:43 AM PDT by NEMDF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NEMDF

RTE :”You might be overlooking the vast majority of child support situations, in which the children live most of the time with one parent, and the other parent pays child support to assist with their legitimate expenses. Why would the child support “go to the child” if the custodial parent is providing their food, shelter, health care, etc., etc. ?’

In those cases, that use of the money could be highly regulated like welfare and SS for kids (when one parent dead) used to be to make sure the parent is not benefiting from it. To be honest, the mother should be a little more worse off without the father in the picture. We were much better off with those unhappy marriages where the kids were involved. and and women avoided the wrong men prior to welfare rights 1960s, and fault divorces. The one that leaves, or cheats should be the one at fault again.

Bush pushed a single Mom tax credit, Pelosi family values.


40 posted on 08/24/2009 8:21:19 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Socialist Conservatives: "'Big government is free because tax cuts pay for it'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

If I was his wife, he wouldn’t have to worry abut any more sexual encounters with other women, paid or not, because he’d be missing the equipment!!

Having unprotected sex with a woman who makes a living having sex with whom ever has the money & bringing what ever diseases he picked up home. Yeah, if I was the wife, I’d be beyond angry!!


41 posted on 08/24/2009 8:27:47 AM PDT by KosmicKitty (WARNING: Hormonally crazed woman ahead!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
I understand your point as well.

Did you know that anyone who has custody or guardianship of an individual who is getting any kind of support payment has the power to decide how to spend the money with no guidelines given (i.e. it must be used directly for the guarded individual's welfare)? Even an adult unrelated to a child who has guardianship for that child has that right. I was amazed that there are no guidelines or requirements on how the money is spent.

(Caveat: I'm not sure that is true in every state, but from what I was reading, it appears to be the case in most states.)

42 posted on 08/24/2009 8:54:01 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
RE :” Even an adult unrelated to a child who has guardianship for that child has that right. I was amazed that there are no guidelines or requirements on how the money is spent.”

Back in the 1980s my Mom had to keep a log of the SS money for my underage sister and report to a federal social worker on how it was spent. They got rid of all that. You can imagine how fraud must have increased.

Child support with no fault divorce turned into a privatized welfare for middle class that encouraged single Mom hood, now considered hero's by compassionate conservatives like GWB (an reelection strategy.)

The part that is frightening is the secret family courts that throw men in jail with no trial for not paying their girlfriends lawyer fees. I rile up freepers here by comparing them with Islamic justice.

43 posted on 08/24/2009 9:11:54 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Socialist Conservatives: "'Big government is free because tax cuts pay for it'")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank
--I'm a little slow this morning--what is that message?

That legalizing vices results in the most happiness for all.

44 posted on 08/24/2009 11:17:30 AM PDT by the invisib1e hand (this slope is getting slippereeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd

He probably blew any chance of custody when he admitted he wasn’t disputing paternity, but nevertheless doesn’t want to support the child.


45 posted on 08/24/2009 11:25:58 AM PDT by Hepsabeth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: NEMDF
Why would the child support “go to the child” if the custodial parent is providing their food, shelter, health care, etc., etc. ?

Because "child support" is ordered literally (well at least theoretically) to support the child's needs. Often times Mama gets way more than what she spends on the child. The rest is used to support HER, and/or her boyfriend. Which is taking funds for one purpose and spending them on another.

46 posted on 08/24/2009 2:12:09 PM PDT by jimt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

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