Lawyers and judges don’t care about what happens to the children. They (lawyers) only care about how much money they can make off the backs of fathers who are getting screwed routinely. Judges only care about how much child support because it goes into the total amounts that the State reports to the Federal government in order to get Federal reimbursement incentive funding under Title 42 USC Sections 658(a-f) based on the increased amounts of support judges award, enforce and collect. The more awarded, collected & enforced, the higher the amounts the Feds send the state each year.
The amounts per state goes into the hundreds of millions. This money goes into the general treasury with no strings attached. The first state officials paid out of the general treasury are judges and state employees (e.g., child support caseworkers, law enforcement who arrest for child support arrears, etc.).
Nice unconstitutional conflict of interest, heh? The US Supreme Court has ruled over and over again that judges cannot sit on cases where they have a financial interest in the outcome of such cases otherwise it causes judicial misconduct and the orders are null & void. Judges who continue to sit on these cases are committing felony Official Misconduct which is an Impeachable offense where judges can be arrested, jailed and have their pensions revoked.
i think if a man has been payin for a child and finds out that the child is not his hell yes give that man every dime back plus fees… he was made to do it. and if he was late omg. and the law should be changed she shouldnt be able to spend money on anything but the child… find a way to insure the money is spent on the kid.
The whole time I was reading this I just kept thinking what about the emotional distress of the child? I didn’t see anything about that. I think that, if a man wants to challenge the validity of a claim that a child is (or isn’t) his then he should do so immediately… not 14 years later. The alleged father, if he were recouped his money, would ‘get over it’ and go on his merry way. But, there isn’t a magic number that could ever repair the whole that would be left in that child’s heart. I agree that the woman should have disclosed the intimate relationship with another man but this man has forged a relationship with this child and I think it’s just awful that he would want to inflict this kind of pain on him after all these years. At this point, it shouldn’t matter whether he is or isn’t the biological father. What a jerk.
Did you miss the part in the article where it said that the father currently has custody of the child? Sort of puts to rest any notion that he’d just “get over it” and “go on his merry way”.
The kid’s mom committed fraud to the tune of $26,000+. She manipulated the system to get money out of a man that she had every reason to believe was not the kid’s father. Yet dad, despite the lack of a biological tie to the child, apparently made his child support payments and remained a significant presence in the kid’s life, going so far as to be awarded primary physical custody (an arrangement, btw, which is wholly unusual in the current family court climate).
But yeah… dad’s a jerk for wanting the woman who defrauded him to be held accountable. It doesn’t matter that he’s the kid’s primary caregiver, has primary physical custody of the kid, and seems to have provided all the material and emotional support demanded of the kid.
There’s always that “Think of the children !” hysteria that accompanies this sort of thing . Imagine if every other crime operated that way ; “Well , you robbed a bank and shot two innocent bystanders but since sending you to prison would cause your family and children to feel bad , you can go home . Here’s cab fare .”
Besides , the way so many people tell it , love has no monetary value . If that’s the case then getting justice through compensation should have no effect whatsoever on whatever relationship a duped ‘father’ has with the child(ren) in question .
If somebody stole thousands of dollars from you , I’ll bet you’d want your money back . Further , explain how wanting YOUR money back signals an immediate cessation of a loving relationship with a third party . Outside of the expected contrived response based on unverifiable and dubious assumptions , you can not only not prove such a claim , you will almost certainly undermine your position in the process .
My stepfather, when he and my mother split, continued to maintain a relationship with me. We are quite close, but it would be wrong to have forced him to financially support my mother, and he was aware I wasn’t his. I don’t see anything wrong with expecting remunerations for the fraud that was committed against both him and the child. He doesn’t need to cut the child out of his life to hold the mother accountable for her actions.
What really bothers me is your flippant dismissal of the mother’s deceit, and the utter outrage at the father’s response. You seem to think that, because she managed to trick him for long enough, she shouldn’t be held accountable for the lies she told both the man and the child. You hold the man accountable for “inflicting” the pain of losing a father, but what about the fact the mother has not only lied, forcing upon the child a man who was not his real father, but also denied the child from actually getting to know who his real father is. Why is it you spend an entire paragraph condemning the man for your assumption that he is throwing away his relationship with the boy (and this is an assumption, as it doesn’t speak one about how his relationship with the boy has changed), but the mothers activity is sloughed off with a single sentence including a but and an attack on the man.
heather, the only distress is the man who paid out $26k of his own money. even though now he has custody of the child, problem is where did the previous money go? you will never know if it went towards the welfare of the child. he should get his money back and then the back owed money should come from the rightful owner.
Courts just don’t seem to grasp the seriousness of paternity fraud. Not only is it fraud in the conventional sense, ie lying to obtain money, but the psychological effect on a man can be on a par with murdering his child.
I strongly disagree. The Courts know Exactly what’s going on. Remember, the business of government is ‘mo business. If you read the entire article, you’ll realize it is true for ANY city in America. This is a national problem.
Suing the mother for fraud is the only fair thing to do . Now , to be completely fair , what should happen is that she loses the case , the REAL father pays her , and when the kid turns 18 (or she gets a job , whichever comes first) the duped sucker gets his money back .
Why the courts don’t return money that was clearly paid under false-pretenses is an injustice in itself . There’s no real logic behind it because there IS a real father somewhere and he’s the guy who’s supposed to pay in the first place . That means that he owes back-payments . She has no right to collect two payments out of this but , at the very least , her duplicity should not go unpunished in some fashion .
Heather, you are a raging moron. From a father’s perspective, you are the reason we hate women. The Mother OBVIOUSLY committed fraud in this case.
I have children of my own that I have sole custody of. I receive ZERO child support, even though I have tried to prosecute the mother for non-payment. Guess what? The MO courts do not care. If it were a man, he would be in jail for failure to pay.
Heather, you are the perfect example of what is wrong with the system in this country. People like you make me sick.
here’s the problem w/society. the woman in most cases get child support because they need it and don’t always care where the money comes. it was not until recently most men are finding out that they are not the father. it’s not that it was fraud in most cases, but because nobody wanted to argue because our testing was not accurate back then. now, if you want it, you had better have gotten a test. backpay for child support? don’t think so, because you admit that your the father and because you are paying support you had better be getting visitation rights! you become connected to that child because of that visitation. now to claim after the fact your not the father, um, why does a father have to be connected biologically? how many dads have become dads because of adoptions or step-dads?! unless they can prove that she was in for him from the get-go, he’ll never get any return on being a good gentlemen (in most cases) in supporting a kid. there are many kids out there with no support of parent for that matter. i am glad now, that the so-called dad’s finally are getting rights.
Here’s the difference, a guy that assumes the step dad role or adopts volunteer for the relationship. The guy who is defrauded is sucked into the relationship under false pretenses. An adopted parent is obligated to support the child. A step dad is not required to support the child by law (unless he adopts).
Something the article didn’t publish, but if you research the court case you will find in the judges order that ruled in favor with Chadwick, the mother is the one who told the child that it wasn’t his biological father, not the man. Chadwick found out it wasn’t his son and didn’t want it told to the child, but the mother did it out of spite. Does that change your opinion any Heather, you idiot!
If the court does not see this as a fraud (which is a felony), then the legal system kills any legal or logical grounds to judge and punish a fraud as a crime.
Absolutely Fraud should be investigated, and the guilty, charged.
However, please see the “Comic Relief” section of http://www.familylawcourts.com.
There’s also a section on Child Support and paternity fraud, but the Comic Relief is exactly that for a system that shreds litigants.
Lawyers and judges don’t care about what happens to the children. They (lawyers) only care about how much money they can make off the backs of fathers who are getting screwed routinely. Judges only care about how much child support because it goes into the total amounts that the State reports to the Federal government in order to get Federal reimbursement incentive funding under Title 42 USC Sections 658(a-f) based on the increased amounts of support judges award, enforce and collect. The more awarded, collected & enforced, the higher the amounts the Feds send the state each year.
The amounts per state goes into the hundreds of millions. This money goes into the general treasury with no strings attached. The first state officials paid out of the general treasury are judges and state employees (e.g., child support caseworkers, law enforcement who arrest for child support arrears, etc.).
Nice unconstitutional conflict of interest, heh? The US Supreme Court has ruled over and over again that judges cannot sit on cases where they have a financial interest in the outcome of such cases otherwise it causes judicial misconduct and the orders are null & void. Judges who continue to sit on these cases are committing felony Official Misconduct which is an Impeachable offense where judges can be arrested, jailed and have their pensions revoked.
i think if a man has been payin for a child and finds out that the child is not his hell yes give that man every dime back plus fees… he was made to do it. and if he was late omg. and the law should be changed she shouldnt be able to spend money on anything but the child… find a way to insure the money is spent on the kid.
The whole time I was reading this I just kept thinking what about the emotional distress of the child? I didn’t see anything about that. I think that, if a man wants to challenge the validity of a claim that a child is (or isn’t) his then he should do so immediately… not 14 years later. The alleged father, if he were recouped his money, would ‘get over it’ and go on his merry way. But, there isn’t a magic number that could ever repair the whole that would be left in that child’s heart. I agree that the woman should have disclosed the intimate relationship with another man but this man has forged a relationship with this child and I think it’s just awful that he would want to inflict this kind of pain on him after all these years. At this point, it shouldn’t matter whether he is or isn’t the biological father. What a jerk.
So suing the mother for fraud = “I’m not your father and I don’t love you”?
Did you miss the part in the article where it said that the father currently has custody of the child? Sort of puts to rest any notion that he’d just “get over it” and “go on his merry way”.
The kid’s mom committed fraud to the tune of $26,000+. She manipulated the system to get money out of a man that she had every reason to believe was not the kid’s father. Yet dad, despite the lack of a biological tie to the child, apparently made his child support payments and remained a significant presence in the kid’s life, going so far as to be awarded primary physical custody (an arrangement, btw, which is wholly unusual in the current family court climate).
But yeah… dad’s a jerk for wanting the woman who defrauded him to be held accountable. It doesn’t matter that he’s the kid’s primary caregiver, has primary physical custody of the kid, and seems to have provided all the material and emotional support demanded of the kid.
There’s always that “Think of the children !” hysteria that accompanies this sort of thing . Imagine if every other crime operated that way ; “Well , you robbed a bank and shot two innocent bystanders but since sending you to prison would cause your family and children to feel bad , you can go home . Here’s cab fare .”
Besides , the way so many people tell it , love has no monetary value . If that’s the case then getting justice through compensation should have no effect whatsoever on whatever relationship a duped ‘father’ has with the child(ren) in question .
If somebody stole thousands of dollars from you , I’ll bet you’d want your money back . Further , explain how wanting YOUR money back signals an immediate cessation of a loving relationship with a third party . Outside of the expected contrived response based on unverifiable and dubious assumptions , you can not only not prove such a claim , you will almost certainly undermine your position in the process .
My stepfather, when he and my mother split, continued to maintain a relationship with me. We are quite close, but it would be wrong to have forced him to financially support my mother, and he was aware I wasn’t his. I don’t see anything wrong with expecting remunerations for the fraud that was committed against both him and the child. He doesn’t need to cut the child out of his life to hold the mother accountable for her actions.
What really bothers me is your flippant dismissal of the mother’s deceit, and the utter outrage at the father’s response. You seem to think that, because she managed to trick him for long enough, she shouldn’t be held accountable for the lies she told both the man and the child. You hold the man accountable for “inflicting” the pain of losing a father, but what about the fact the mother has not only lied, forcing upon the child a man who was not his real father, but also denied the child from actually getting to know who his real father is. Why is it you spend an entire paragraph condemning the man for your assumption that he is throwing away his relationship with the boy (and this is an assumption, as it doesn’t speak one about how his relationship with the boy has changed), but the mothers activity is sloughed off with a single sentence including a but and an attack on the man.
heather, the only distress is the man who paid out $26k of his own money. even though now he has custody of the child, problem is where did the previous money go? you will never know if it went towards the welfare of the child. he should get his money back and then the back owed money should come from the rightful owner.
Courts just don’t seem to grasp the seriousness of paternity fraud. Not only is it fraud in the conventional sense, ie lying to obtain money, but the psychological effect on a man can be on a par with murdering his child.
The penalty should include prison time.
I strongly disagree. The Courts know Exactly what’s going on. Remember, the business of government is ‘mo business. If you read the entire article, you’ll realize it is true for ANY city in America. This is a national problem.
http://www.examiner.com/public-policy-in-san-diego/san-diego-s-mayoral-race-which-candidates-ignore-half-the-population
Suing the mother for fraud is the only fair thing to do . Now , to be completely fair , what should happen is that she loses the case , the REAL father pays her , and when the kid turns 18 (or she gets a job , whichever comes first) the duped sucker gets his money back .
Why the courts don’t return money that was clearly paid under false-pretenses is an injustice in itself . There’s no real logic behind it because there IS a real father somewhere and he’s the guy who’s supposed to pay in the first place . That means that he owes back-payments . She has no right to collect two payments out of this but , at the very least , her duplicity should not go unpunished in some fashion .
Heather, you are a raging moron. From a father’s perspective, you are the reason we hate women. The Mother OBVIOUSLY committed fraud in this case.
I have children of my own that I have sole custody of. I receive ZERO child support, even though I have tried to prosecute the mother for non-payment. Guess what? The MO courts do not care. If it were a man, he would be in jail for failure to pay.
Heather, you are the perfect example of what is wrong with the system in this country. People like you make me sick.
here’s the problem w/society. the woman in most cases get child support because they need it and don’t always care where the money comes. it was not until recently most men are finding out that they are not the father. it’s not that it was fraud in most cases, but because nobody wanted to argue because our testing was not accurate back then. now, if you want it, you had better have gotten a test. backpay for child support? don’t think so, because you admit that your the father and because you are paying support you had better be getting visitation rights! you become connected to that child because of that visitation. now to claim after the fact your not the father, um, why does a father have to be connected biologically? how many dads have become dads because of adoptions or step-dads?! unless they can prove that she was in for him from the get-go, he’ll never get any return on being a good gentlemen (in most cases) in supporting a kid. there are many kids out there with no support of parent for that matter. i am glad now, that the so-called dad’s finally are getting rights.
You should be arrested for advocating fraud and thrown in jail for life for advocating slavery.
You can kind of make an argument for child support if the child is his. But if the child isn’t then it is slavery.
There is a big difference between being cuckolded and choosing to take a child as if it was your own.
Your a monster.
Here’s the difference, a guy that assumes the step dad role or adopts volunteer for the relationship. The guy who is defrauded is sucked into the relationship under false pretenses. An adopted parent is obligated to support the child. A step dad is not required to support the child by law (unless he adopts).
Something the article didn’t publish, but if you research the court case you will find in the judges order that ruled in favor with Chadwick, the mother is the one who told the child that it wasn’t his biological father, not the man. Chadwick found out it wasn’t his son and didn’t want it told to the child, but the mother did it out of spite. Does that change your opinion any Heather, you idiot!
If the court does not see this as a fraud (which is a felony), then the legal system kills any legal or logical grounds to judge and punish a fraud as a crime.