Touche.
Posted on 04/10/2007 1:21:59 PM PDT by Quick or Dead
JEFFERSON CITY — David Salazar is what many would call a "duped dad."
Repeatedly, courts have ordered him to pay child support for a 5-year-old girl, even though no one — not a judge and not the child's mother — claims he's the father.
In the eyes of many, Salazar, of Buchanan County, is the victim of a law that traps men into the child support payments, even though they can prove they're not the dads.
-snip-
That kind of statement angers Sen. Chris Koster, who is sponsoring the Missouri bill.
Koster, R-Harrisonville, said he knew children would be harmed as men used DNA to break paternity. But he said the current law mocked justice by pretending that a man is a father even when the evidence proves otherwise.
His bill would allow men to bring forward DNA evidence at any time to prove they are not obligated to pay child support.
-snip-
Linda Elrod, director of the Children and Family Law Center at Washburn University, said she was saddened by cases where DNA evidence was used to challenge paternity. She said the cases not only cut off support payments but often ruptured a mature parental bond.
Others, such as Jacobs, want to set a two-year deadline for using genetic tests to challenge paternity. She said courts also needed the discretion to weigh the quality of a parental relationship and the best interest of a child.
But Koster said such arguments by law professors ignored the fundamental truth in many cases — that the man is not the father and should not be obligated to pretend he is.
"It would be just as arbitrary to hang the responsibility of supporting the child with those professors," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...
uh... nope. they used DNA to show their innocence. THEY didn't break paternity - can't break what ain't there!
Unless the mom was Anna Nicole, then the guys are lining up claiming the kid is theirs and they are thrilled to be a father.
I have to agree.
If a man can prove by DNA that he is not the father, he should not be listed on the birth certificate, and should be under no obligation to support a child that is not his.
The mother should then go after the ‘real’ father for support.
Contact Maury :) he’ll help you find your babies Daddy.
And there you have it.
I personally know a man who committed suicide under those circumstances, while his wife took vacations with her new boyfriend and her discarded husband's alimony and support checks.
Ugh..that’s awful.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Touche.
If the child has come to know the husband as their father, it’s incumbent on the man to step up and continue a personal relationship with the child, and provide financial support.
I love it when men of small raisins whine about this. Step up and be a man!
I also call it legalized extortion and larceny.
She should also go to jail for fraud. Many times the mother actually KNOWS who the father is but still permits the non-father to pay. This should be CRIMINAL.
Once the government has its snout so deeply into ones wallet that there is nothing left, simply dissappear. If necessary, leave the country.
There are many cases of loose women hitting up anybody they’ve ever been with for child support once they get a kid. They’ve been loose their whole life except in court when they swear the guy they’ve dragged in there was the “only one they were with at the time”.
“Keep it in your pants” isn’t just about diseases these days for men.
No argument there.
Ok, so you are saying that a man who is not the biological father of a child should pay for that child? What an asshat! Answer as you will, you will still be an asshat.
Good example of unwilling participants.
“If a man can prove by DNA that he is not the father, he should not be listed on the birth certificate.”
Unknown to me, I was listed on the birth certificate of a child whose mother I had never met; even gave the kid my name. She saw me in the newspaper giving a fair amount of money to a school and decided that she liked the looks of me, and that I was just the person to name as dad.
Found out about it when the kid was 4 or 5 and momma (a drug-addled drifter) went to jail and the State of Texas sought to collect child support from age 0 to 5 (and in the future) from me.
Cost a fair amount of money to remedy, got in the local paper, and Mrs. MWT was JUST SO pleased to be wakened by a Dep. Sheriff with a citation in his hand saying that I had run around on her.
What a fun time!
End of story: yes, this got fixed, with DNA test that I paid for. Part of the issue was, of course, the fact that this had been on file for 5 years -— “I should have acted sooner,” the State claimed -— like I go check the records of every kid born in the State of Texas.
BUT they kid still bears my name, and the birth certificate STILL lists me as the father. My wills and trusts take this into account.
All because a crack whore saw me in the paper.
There was a bill in California to help men who had been falsely named as fathers...Gray Davis vetoed the bill to please the NOW contingent.
In each case the child has a real father--why isn't he being asked to support his child?
Laws were passed to reward the feminazi man-haters by making men miserable. They have done just what they were supposed to do.
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.