doubt my fatherhood

[theother]

Yeah, I can see your point. However, I think that a lot of people get frustrated and give up when they think things are too hard until something gives them the motivation to try to correct the situation. When you are by yourself, it's easy to just stop caring and to be self-destructive. But, a lot of people who wouldn't stand up for themselves, will fight for their families. Now, giving up and just accepting whatever crap is happening isn't bravest thing to do nor the wisest, but it's an understandable thing that most people have done. If we all were held absolutely responsible for the things that we did when we were sixteen, then we would all be in trouble. I just don't think he should have to pay for the next decade solely because he was stupid enough to believe some girl's lies. I could declare bankruptcy and be completely free of all my mistakes in less than 10 years. Even drug addicts and criminals can clean up their acts and spend less time being "punished". Besides, the mother should have to take some responsibility for her mistake, if she named him as the father when she knew there were other possibilities. Why does she get off scott-free? That's just my opinion. Apparently, the courts don't agree with it. A CS check in the hand is worth two when you have to track down all the guys some chick slept with, I guess. Of course, if he is the father, then he should continue to pay since he is responsible for HIS child's well-being.


I guess this is one situation where being a woman is a great advantage. I will never have to wonder if my child is actually mine. No one will ever be able to trick me into paying CS on someone else's kid.

 

[mrseld]

She shouldn't get off scott-free. Maybe the law should start making these women reimburse the "alleged father" back the money if it's proven he isn't the father. But then we're back to taking money away from the child again!

Oh well, let's just be glad it's not my butt or yours in the ringer on this one.

 

[mrseld]

She shouldn't get off scott-free. Maybe the law should start making these women reimburse the "alleged father" back the money if it's proven he isn't the father. But then we're back to taking money away from the child again!

Oh well, let's just be glad it's not my butt or yours in the ringer on this one.

 

[nextwife]

"She shouldn't get off scott-free. Maybe the law should start making these women reimburse the "alleged father" back the money if it's proven he isn't the father. But then we're back to taking money away from the child again!"

Persons who commit a fraud of this magnitude and importance should not be allowed to contstantly be rewarded for their fraud or just get away with it because they have a kid, and doing what's right is not in the best interests of a child. Do we permit embezellers to get away with embezzeling and not pay restitution because it would take ill-gotten gains away from their child? Do we permit other forms of fraud to go unchallenged and have those quilty of it to keep the gains because they have kids and reimbursement would take money away from their kids? A fraud commited under the quise of CS should not be any less accountable because they used a different forum to commit fraud.

 

[mrseld]

Calm down. It was just an idea of the direction we might want to go in.

 

[theother]

Those are really good points, Nextwife. However, I don't think that would ever happen. I would just like to see these men relieved of the burden of any future CS. Perhaps that would be the incentive for people to do the DNA testing in a timely manner. If you don't step up to protect your rights, then you will lose all the money that you have already paid until you do take that step.