DNA Paternity Fraud Case To U.S. Supreme Court

Men's News Daily ^ | May 31, 2002 | Jeffery Leving

[RogerFGay]

So, let me get this straight. I can finger a guy as the father of my child, set up a court date, not tell him, he doesn't show up because he knows nothing about it, and he could end up supporting my kid until he's 18. No-Brainer!

Yes. And it's been proven many times over that, not only does he not have to be the actual father but it isn't even necessary that he's ever met the mother. If he's out of town when the notice comes, or it goes to the wrong address, or it's a different guy with the same name, or they got the name wrong, too bad.

[muawiyah]

These tests are given because someone has "doubt". What's amazing is that even in the face of "doubt", which may well be fully justified by other factors, you have 72% are OK!

Think about it - bad actors show 72% faithfulness - for others the figure has to be even higher, approaching 100%, barring artificial insemination, good friends, etc.

[RogerFGay]

To top it off, the story had some wench from some feminazi group that was saying ,(paraphrased) "It doesn't matter if he isn't the father, the needs of the child outweigh his concerns". Unbelievable !

Feminists deciding what's best for children is like teenagers deciding what goes best on pizza. One minute they're drooling over it, the next minute it's gone.

[RogerFGay]

What is really amazing is when they have two or three men tested and none of them is the dad.

The welfare system now demands that women "cooperate" in the effort to determine paternity as a condition for continued eligibility for beneifts. It's a known fact that many pick names and addresses randomly out of a phone book to meet the requirement. As soon as one doesn't respond or fails to do paperwork properly -- ping! He's dad.

[RogerFGay]

If all women were tested the numbers would be much lower. That rate is for those who willingly seek a DNA test because they believe their spouse has cheated. (winodog)

That is just a guess on your part. Who knows what the rate would be if all women were tested.

I think winodog could very well be right. Sorry I can't give you a source, but somewhere in the back of my mind I'm thinking less than half that for the total population. Don't quote me exactly because I can't even remember where I got that idea. Anyway, I suspect based on DNA tests being done in relation to welfare cases, the result would be higher than the general population. See my post above.

[RogerFGay]

What you describe you are doing in North Carolina is a dream world compared to the way it's done in other places, and by other people. People really do become designated fathers because they didn't get the paperwork in on time, or the child support agency sent notice to the wrong address (same name perhaps), or whatever. They biggest crime that is committed by the system is in not correcting an error after they've finished the paperwork designating a father and ordering child support.

He then shows up with the bill in his hand and says -- "I'm not the father and I can prove it." Too bad, they tell him. We have our procedures and dealing with this isn't in the handbook. I've lived in a socialist country for years, so you can take my word for it. People in the former Soviet Union wouldn't think this sort of behavior by the state was anything unusual; although they might be shocked to find it happening in the US.

[RogerFGay]

50% of married men cheat on their wives, ...

No.

[waterstraat]

Are you aware that 33% of "ALL" births in America are illegitimate?

[Publius6961]

This can happen to married men because many states adhere to a 500-year-old English common-law doctrine that presumes a married man is the father of a child born of the marriage.

This made total sense in the age where there was literally no earthly way to conclusively determine paternity.

The importance of the family unit and the necessity to protect children demanded it. In spite of strange changes to our society's rules, that importance and necessity is needed more than ever.

Having said that, now that there is a means of unambiguosly determining the fraud and criminality involved, it is time to dump that well-intentioned 500-year-old law, and to stop rewarding fraud and crime.
Not only should the payments stop, but the female perpetrators should be forced to make restitution and/or do jail time.

It's a no-brainer, from my perspective.

[RogerFGay]

First, take the case of a married man who goes through a divorce, through his fault or not. After the divorce, sometimes years later, the "father" finds out he is not the biological father of his children.

Women file for divorce far more often than men, and quite often while children are quite young. I'm left wondering how much of a connection there is between their decision to divorce and what we're talking about. Most often, it's said, the husband is surprised and confused when she decides to leave him. Could it be on account of her big secret?

[RogerFGay]

Bernard Goldberg in Bias gives some chilling examples of this kind of fraud. Gil Garcetti in L.A. has been particularly callous in handling cases like this--sometimes of men with no involvement whatever who just happen to have the same first name and last name as the man alleged to be the father. Garcetti is merciless in enforcing the 30-day rule: if the man accused doesn't fight it within 30 days he has to pay, even when he wasn't informed until after the 30 days had elapsed.

That's the name I couldn't remember -- Gil Garcetti. Can you believe he's not in jail? The press in California has been much, much better than average about reporting the problems, outrages, and fraud in the CS system. Their only fault (and this probably doesn't matter to most of their readers) is that they tend to talk about the system as if it's a local invention, and don't tie it to the national problem. Of course, it would be even better if the national moratorium on reporting on these things was completely lifted in other states.

[waterstraat]

No.

The Hite Report on Male Sexuality (1980), surveying 7,239 men, found 72% of men married two years or more had had sex outside of marriage. But wait, here's an oink of a surprise -- the increase for women having affairs has been even more significant.

The Kinsey Report (1948) sampled 6,000 women and showed that by age forty, 26% of the women had experienced extramarital sexual intercourse.

Morton Hunt's 1972 survey showed that 52% of divorced women had had an affair, many of which occurred during the last few years of the marriage.

Cosmopolitan magazine's 1980 survey of 106,000 readers (women between the ages of 18 and 34) reported that 50% had at least one extramarital experience. For those over age 35, it jumped to 69.2%.

Sociologist Lynn Atwater, author of The Extramarital Connection (1982), a book about women having extramarital affairs, reported, "it is among women, more so than men, that rates of extramarital participation are rising dramatically."

And Shere Hite's 1987 report of 4,500 women in Women and Love found that 70% of women married five years or more were having sex outside of their marriages.

[Publius6961]

Most likely they will rule the needs of the child outweight the rights (and fairness under the law) of the duped "parent".

Because it's expedient and convenient?
I certainly hope not.

Injustice is injustice.

If the welfare of the child is so important, the woman should be forced to divulge the father's name.
Finally, what is the result when a known father is literally unable to provide financial support now?

The criminal (woman) should be subject to exactly the same penalties, should she be unwilling or unable to name the biological father.

[RogerFGay]

Are you aware that 33% of "ALL" births in America are illegitimate?

No. I already said that I doubt it's that high. But anyway, if you know your biology or can do any math; that wouldn't show that 50% of men cheat on their wives in any case.

[waterstraat]

Are you aware that 33% of "ALL" births in America are illegitimate?

As the percent of all births to unmarried black mothers more than tripled, from 21.6% to 69.8%, the percent of all births to unmarried White mothers increased more than 11 fold, from 2.3% to 25.7%.

http://christianparty.net/blacksillegitimacy.htm

[RogerFGay]

This can happen to married men because many states adhere to a 500-year-old English common-law doctrine that presumes a married man is the father of a child born of the marriage.

This made total sense in the age where there was literally no earthly way to conclusively determine paternity.

The key here is understanding the difference between a "presumption" and no way out. I suppose even 500 years ago, if the woman admitted sleeping with someone else and confirmed she hadn't been with her husband in years, and the other guy accepted responsibility, they'd designate the other guy as the father. They "presumed" the husband was the father, but evidence weighed too heavily against the presumption.

Now with DNA testing, one can check to see if mamma's new husband, the guy she tells little Johnny to call "daddy" is actually the father of your child. And you can wonder how the new guy can be such a sleeze that he doesn't claim his own son. Well, the fact that he slept with and then stole your wife should probably be a hint.

[Nick Danger]

If all women were tested the numbers would be much lower.

Not much lower. There is a famous study that was done in the 1920's or 1930's (if I find the link I'll post it) by some doctor who was studying the inheritability of disease. He acquired a fairly large random sample of blood tests from couples and their children. He went on to publish his study, but never mentioned something that was found in his notes years later, after he had died... that in 20% of the cases, the fathers were not related to the children. He thought it the better part of valor to simply exclude such families from his study, and not say anything. Remember, this was using blood tests, which have a much higher rate of false positives than DNA tests do.

There is nothing new here... cuckoldry is as old as humanity.

[waterstraat]

Are you aware that 33% of "ALL" births in America are illegitimate?

Yes, 1/3 of ALL!!!! american births are now illegitimate !!!

1/3 of ALL americans are B*******.

1/3 of all american babies do not have married parents.

Is this clear now?

Where have you been?

http://cloud9.norc.uchicago.edu/dlib/sc-42.htm

Moveover, during the last generation, childbearing increasingly became disconnected from marriage. In 1960 only 5.3% of births were to unmarried mothers while by 1996 over 32% of all births were outside of marriage (Table 4).3

The Emerging 21st Century American Family Tom W. Smith National Opinion Research Center University of Chicago RELEASE DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1999 GSS Social Change Report No. 42

Are you still under the illusion that all women are sugar and spice?

The good news, is that we have had "zero population growth for the past 30 years(less traffic, less taxes, cheaper home prices, full employment, employers begging for workers, high school and college graduates hunted down hungry companies wanting replacement employees, etc)

The bad news, is that with record immigration, american born workers cannot find jobs, and our population instead of being about 220 million, it is now well over 285 million .

http://cloud9.norc.uchicago.edu/dlib/sc-42.htm

Along with the decline of marriage has come a decline in childbearing. The fertility rate peaked at 3.65 children per woman at the height of the Baby Boom in 1957 and then declined rapidly to a rate of 1.75 children in 1975. This is below the "replacement level" of about 2.11 children that is needed for a population to hold its own through natural increase. The rate then slowly gained ground to 2.0-2.1 children in the early 1990s. The results of the changes in the fertility rate are shown in Table 3.

[friendly]

Excellent post. I hope that the Supreme Court moves to correct this horrible injustice.

My only comment is that this is only one of many anti-male, anti-father injustices in the dung heap of a legal system in the US.

In order to pander to feminazis, I would point out an example in NY. As one of his first acts in office, RINO Governor George Pataki signed a law making males totally without rights in any area of the restraining order process.

To give an example, I have a friend who is a distinguished NY City detective who cannot visit his children, even though it is court ordered. The lawyer ex-wife has a completely bogus Order of Protection, based on no evidence whatsoever. The detective knows full well that if he ever tries to pick up his young children at curbside, even if he brings a witness, the ex-wife has only to make an unsubstantiated allegation and he is automatically arrested under the Pataki/Democrat law no questions asked. He knows this because he himself has had to enforce this horrifcally unjust law, knowing full well that the men he arrested were innocent.

[waterstraat]

Are you aware that 33% of "ALL" births in America are illegitimate? No. I already said that I doubt it's that high. But anyway, if you know your biology or can do any math; that wouldn't show that 50% of men cheat on their wives in any case.

If you have doubts about todays illegitimacy rate, then you do not believe EVERY study and EVERY official statistic about todays childbirths.

http://www.unmarried.org/statistics.html

33% of all births are to unmarried women. - National Center for Health Statistics, 1999 data (report released 2001)

Things have changed since women now wear the pants, can now smoke cigarettes, drink men under the table, and train to be marines.

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/usadecline.html

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/usadecline.html#table