Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
She hasn't proposed a specific penalty for fraud in these cases, but I don't see where she's necessarily advocating fraud. She's just saying how you can avoid being a victim.
Keeping it real, do you think most married women are going to be cool with their husbands asking for dna testing? And if this is such a great solution, why are most women's groups opposed to mandatory dna testing for all children?
In other words you support amoral, criminal, and despicable behavior. You fully support paternity fraud.
If your definition of having your child's best interest at heart by fulfilling your responsibility of providing at the least the basic needs of your child is abnormal, despicable and criminal behavior then yes.
For the rest of the population providing for your child (one you legally accepted responsibility for) is considered normal and expected behavior. That is what I support.
Yes. I would like to see aggressive prosecution and jailing of criminals that commit this heinous crime. IMO- 20-25 years is about right, maybe more. Perhaps in certain situation the prison sentence could be deferred until the child turns 18 as a nod to the 'for the children' crowd.
I would think it could just fall under regular fraud laws. There are already sentences in place for different levels of fraud depending on how much money is at stake. Most would fall under 3rd degree felony fraud and some might cross over into 2nd degree. I think that means the maximum would be 10 years.
I don't think you can defer sentences. You would defer a sentence for a parent who committed another crime would you?
Of course, there may also be other crimes associated with the parentity fraud (purgery comes to mind because I would think you'd need to file some kind of legal paperwork for child support).
Of course, the real issue would be unless dad does a DNA test, mom could just say she thought he was the father. It wasn't intentional fraud. And it might not be. Some people aren't very bright and make weird assumptions. I could see some low IQ person thinking just because she cheated that one time, the other man couldn't be the father. Nothing surprises me any more when it comes to how dumb some people can be.
Last edited by TMBGBlueCanary; 08-16-2019 at 09:46 AM..
She wants to reserve the right to commit fraud without accountability or oversight. It's glaringly obvious.
how is telling someone they are the father of an unborn child taking away securing any financial gain or depriving anyone of legal rights?
Requiring the accused father to voluntarily (not forced) accept paternity or not through acquiesce or absolute agreement and allowing DNA proof is accountability. You can not be a victim of fraud if you know the truth.
If your definition of having your child's best interest at heart by fulfilling your responsibility of providing at the least the basic needs of your child is abnormal, despicable and criminal behavior then yes.
For the rest of the population providing for your child (one you legally accepted responsibility for) is considered normal and expected behavior. That is what I support.
So trying to pin paternity on an innocent victim is fulfilling your responsibility to the child?
Keeping it real, do you think most married women are going to be cool with their husbands asking for dna testing? And if this is such a great solution, why are most women's groups opposed to mandatory dna testing for all children?
I don't think most would care. The way everyone is already doing this voluntarily though Ancestry.com and such, I don't think they mind.
The problem isn't so much that people afraid to get it done or women's groups (although I'm sure there are some out there who don't want it done). The problem is that it costs money and who is going to pay for it? Medical insurance? The government? What if people feel this is an invasion of privacy? Where will the information be stored and who has control of it? If insurance picks up the bill, can they use that information to deny future health coverage? It's a slippery slope just like wire tapping or other things the government can do to "keep us safe."
I think all those questions are why it might be best to leave it a choice. Although I would like to see it covered by health insurance.
It's pretty sick, twisted, and disgusting to make fun of a victim of a crime. Nice job.
And there are multiple victims in paternity fraud. The child is also a victim. But clearly you aren't concerned whatsoever with the child because you want to maintain your opportunity to commit paternity fraud at all costs.
How are you defrauded. You agree to accept responsibility/consequences without proof. Or you can ask for proof and decline responsibility. Just like buying a car that is marked as is without warranty , or buying a house without title searches and inspections.
There is no victim of crime, you have lost no legal rights nor finances by being told you are the father of an child. The law was changed to protect men from paternity fraud.
I would think it could just fall under regular fraud laws. There are already sentences in place for different levels of fraud depending on how much money is at stake. Most would fall under 3rd degree felony fraud and some might cross over into 2nd degree. I think that means the maximum would be 10 years.
I don't think you can defer sentences. You would defer a sentence for a parent who committed another crime would you?
Of course, there may also be other crimes associated with the parity fraud (purgery comes to mind because I would think you'd need to file some kind of legal paperwork for child support).
Of course, the real issue would be unless dad does a DNA test, mom could just say she thought he was the father. It wasn't intentional fraud. And it might not be. Some people aren't very bright and make weird assumptions. I could see some low IQ person thinking just because she cheated that one time, the other man couldn't be the father. Nothing surprises me any more when it comes to how dumb some people can be.
Just more mental gymnastics trying to clear Mom of any accountability. If she cheated and doesn't disclose it, that's a lie of huge lie of omission. It's still clearly fraudulent to fail to disclose the possibility of an alternate Dad.
It's pretty sick, twisted, and disgusting to make fun of a victim of a crime. Nice job.
And there are multiple victims in paternity fraud. The child is also a victim. But clearly you aren't concerned whatsoever with the child because you want to maintain your opportunity to commit paternity fraud at all costs.
You clearly aren't concerned about the child if you want to put their mother in prison for 20+ years - that would have severe consequences on the child.
Just admit it, this is just about controlling women and getting revenge.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
