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.
If she told him the child was his, it's absolutely her fault and not his.
Not to mention that any contract entered into under false pretenses is automatically null and void.
How so? She thought it was his.
He had sex with her.
If he thought it might not be his, he should've investigated the matter. I would if someone wanted me to take responsibility for another human being and send them part of my income.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Did they ever live together? He said he first saw his daughter when she was 16. There apparently is no return of service for the subpoena the court said they served. The only evidence they have that he failed to contest three $31 support payments, and I'm not sure if he knew what the deductions were for.
He should have looked into that.
Seriously, I'm amazed at the attitude that this guy should've done nothing, and even though he paid something and had no clue why he was paying it, or so he claims, he only contested this when the back support became a lot of money.
He sounds kinda slack.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Right now there's no evidence that he did agree. The girlfriend who "vowed there was no way he wasn’t the rightful dad" claims several years ago CS payments were deducted. He says he knew nothing about it, right now who appears the more credible. Was money deducted? It's easy to find out one way or the other, there would have to be a record and employment records of the time. If there are no records, or the records don't match, he took responsibility for nothing.
Let's not be hasty and make statements that are not supported by the evidence.
If he paid anything for support and never questioned it, then this is on him.
If he never paid and was never in any way made aware of this situation, I agree that this isn't his fault.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
But there is support available. The majority of those on assistance are single mothers.
What if mom and dad were both charged with having 2K per month to put in an account for the kids. Mom and dad both lose their job and dont have the 2K. Mom gets government assistance to cover the rent, food, etc. the kids need that month. Dad goes to jail.
I get that a parents main priority is to care for their kids. Lets just realize that the custodial parent has a no fault back up when things get rough.
That sounds like you think it's easy to get assistance. It's not.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
So, they were dating. She had a kid she thought was his. They started garnishing his wages years ago and he never questioned it.
He finally up and decided he wanted a paternity test and this test proved he's not the father.
Here's where he messed up... he didn't go right in immediately and ask for that test.
To the state, this demonstrated that he believed himself to be the father and that he was willing to pay child support.
It's his own fault for not getting this checked out right away. Nobody can say she was trying to pull a fast one, because she may well have believed he was the father.
And, ultimately, the child still needs care.
Men? If you are with a woman and you are not married to her, you need to get a DNA test if you don't want to pay child support. Period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez
For the most part I agree, but once the DNA test confirms he isn't the dad, he should be let off the hook. He shouldn't be entitled to a refund of past payments. (Not implying he is trying to get a refund)
Agree with PM here. Like he said: NO "refunds" for money already paid out but, NO liability on out for a kid that ain't his assuming he didn't adopt that kid, not even back child support.
If he paid anything for support and never questioned it, then this is on him.
If he never paid and was never in any way made aware of this situation, I agree that this isn't his fault.
I read the story again, it looks like
1. He met the child only once
2. In 2003, a child support court in Texas ruled that the man had to pay child support to his ex-girlfriend, who had recently given birth, because she vowed there was no way he wasn’t the rightful dad.
3. He soon met the minor for the first and only time — describing her as a “wonderful girl” — but after taking a DNA test, learned she was not his after all.
The amount of MGTOW bashing in this thread is amazing. As if, unless MGTOW as an 'organization' starts protesting and having sit-ins, they aren't helping the situation. One idiot said MGTOW should 'change laws'. Dude, WTF are you talking about? smdh
The point of MGTOW is to EDUCATE men about the way society works, especially with respect to things like what you see in this article. So that men can protect themselves from harpies like this woman. What people find objectionable about that, I'll never understand. They're not trying to change laws or society. That's why it's called Men Go Their OWN WAY. Removing themselves from situations like this that could wind up with them paying $65K in child support that that they shouldn't owe at all.
There are so many people making excuses for what the court allowed, and continues to allow, this woman to do. It's quite sad.
Agree with PM here. Like he said: NO "refunds" for money already paid out but, NO liability on out for a kid that ain't his assuming he didn't adopt that kid, not even back child support.
Well, if he didn't agree to support the child and accept the paternity results without challenge, I also agree.
If he accepted them and agreed to pay, that's on him. I think of that sort of thing much like adoption.
He agreed to provide. He should provide.
I'd say the same if this was a woman agreeing to provide, btw.
Now, that said, if she were to agree that he wasn't obliged since he turned out not to be the dad (and I would certainly not want him to pay if I was her), then that's another matter.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Well, if he didn't agree to support the child and accept the paternity results without challenge, I also agree.
If he accepted them and agreed to pay, that's on him. I think of that sort of thing much like adoption.
He agreed to provide. He should provide.
I'd say the same if this was a woman agreeing to provide, btw.
Now, that said, if she were to agree that he wasn't obliged since he turned out not to be the dad (and I would certainly not want him to pay if I was her), then that's another matter.
No, it is not the same as adoption.
If he has been deceived, then he shouldn't be paying child support.
Of course this is just wishful thinking.
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.
