Prev: Marriage and the Silent Treatment?
Next: No Holidays for an Atheist
From: Andre Lieven on 10 Apr 2006 12:30
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1144414531354

Paternity fraud is rampant in the United States, triggering legislation and
legal challenges in more than a dozen states, according to family law attorneys
and fathers' rights activists.

At issue: Men claim women are getting away with trickery -- DNA evidence may
show a man is not the father, but the courts are still forcing him to pay child
support anyway.

"This is the new underdog," said Michigan family law attorney Michele Kelly, who
represents mostly men tangled in paternity disputes. "I was a staunch feminist.
I marched with Gloria Steinem. But the new victims in America are working men.
All they are is a mule train."

Most recently, Kelly secured a victory for a Michigan man who had paid an
estimated $80,000 in child support over 15 years to his ex-wife, despite DNA
evidence that proved he wasn't the father of their first son. On March 23, after
a bitter court battle, the case settled with the ex-wife agreeing to have all
child support canceled. Richardson v. Luria, No. 91-7019-DM (Bay Co., Mich.,
Cir. Ct.).

The woman's lawyer, Robert Dunn, a solo practitioner based in Bay City, Mich.,
was unavailable for comment.

Meanwhile, Kelly, of Kelly & Kelly in Northville, Mich., said this case is just
the tip of the iceberg.

"One case is just more outrageous than the next," she said.

According to a recent study in New Hampshire, as many as 30 percent of those
paying child support are not the biological fathers of the children being
supported. California is also expected to release results from a similar study
later this year.

"Paternity fraud is a growing concern for men and children everywhere," the New
Hampshire report concluded. "It can spawn considerable grief for the men who may
or may not be emotionally attached to a child they later discover was fathered
by another; and possibly unsettling for children who may discover the false
nature of their paternity."

Attorneys and fathers' rights activists claim that a big problem facing men
today is that a large majority of states -- 38 in total -- still have laws on
the books that require a man to pay child support, even with DNA evidence
showing that he is not the father.

Most states rely on a 500-year-old English common law doctrine, which holds that
a married man is always legally presumed to be the father of a child born of the
marriage.

STATES RESPOND

Meanwhile, many states are responding to the alleged widespread problem of
paternity fraud with new laws.

Florida is about to pass a new law that would end child support if a man proves
he's not the father.

In Colorado, a new state law took effect this year that permits men, for the
first time, to challenge the paternity of alleged offspring -- at least during
the proceedings of a divorce, separation or child-support action.

And Michigan is considering a bill that would require the courts to withdraw
child support if a man proves he is not the father.

A dozen other states have also made similar changes to paternity laws, most of
them in the last five years, that allow for men to disestablish paternity. These
states include Ohio, Georgia, Maryland and Alabama.

FITTING A '1950s LIFESTYLE'

"Clearly today, more than ever before, paternity is raised more frequently,"
said family law expert John P. Paone Jr. of Paone & Zaleski in Woodbridge, N.J.,
who believes old paternity laws don't work in today's world.

"The reality is that now there are women, as well as men, who are engaging in
extramarital relations. Welcome to Desperate Housewives. Here we are," he said.

Paone, former chairman of the Family Law Section for the New Jersey State Bar
Association, believes that new legislation is needed to reflect the change in
societal mores.

"This presumption that a child born during the marriage is the biological child
of the mother and father may no longer be appropriate," Paone said. "These
things all worked very well in a 1950s lifestyle, but today that may be the
exception to the rule," Paone said.

But Paula Roberts, an attorney with the Center for Law and Social Policy in
Washington, doesn't view paternity fraud as a growing problem.

Instead, she argues that actual fraud occurs very rarely, and that most men who
challenge paternity do so only after a relationship sours.

Roberts also cautions states against passing overly broad laws that allow men to
disestablish paternity.

"What worries me about these laws is they behave as if all the fact patterns are
the same, and that it's always some poor defrauded guy as opposed to what you
see when you read the case law," Roberts said. "If you read the case law, what
you discover is that there is a small number of cases in which the guy has
actually been defrauded."

Roberts said that in recent years, she has helped draft model laws, adopted in
several states, that allow men and women to get genetic testing within the first
two years of a child's life. If the test shows the father is not the biological
parent, then he has the right to disestablish paternity.

Such laws have been adopted in Delaware, North Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington
and Wyoming, and Roberts believes that the two-year age limit is better than the
"anyone can sue anytime approach," which can hurt children.

STATES ARE BEHIND

Linda S. Ferrer, a family law practitioner in California who has handled dozens
of paternity fraud lawsuits in recent years, agreed.

"The states are just behind the times," said Ferrer, who called paternity fraud
"a tremendous problem.

"It really seems that there are so many deadbeat dads out there and they should
be going after the real father instead of hanging the hat on any guy that the
mom points the finger to," Ferrer said.

Ferrer, a solo in Santa Ana, Calif., won a landmark 2004 court ruling in which
she helped a construction worker get a child support order thrown out after
proving he was not the father. A lower court had refused the man's request,
saying too much time had elapsed, but he won on appeal.

"[W]hen a mistake occurs in a child support action, the county must correct it,
not exploit it," California's 2d District Court of Appeal said in its ruling.
County of Los Angeles v. Navarro, 120 Cal. App. 4th 246.

Since the Navarro ruling, Ferrer has helped set aside 20 default paternity
judgments against men who proved they were not the biological fathers.

Statewide, she said, roughly 700 similar default judgments have been set aside
since the ruling.

But some legal experts argue that the paternity-fraud movement is creating a
backlash.

Michigan State University Law Professor Melanie Jacobs cautions states about
passing new paternity-fraud laws, arguing children could get hurt in the long
run.

"I think the problem with those laws is that, No. 1, they need to consider a
child's best interest. I'm not trying to minimize the trauma to the
nonbiological father, his feeling of betrayal," Jacobs said.

"But I can only imagine how traumatic it is for the child who learns that
someone is not their father, and suddenly that father goes to court and says not
only do I not want to pay for this child's [upbringing], I want to legally be
declared the nonfather," Jacobs added.

STRICT LIMITATION NEEDED?

Jacobs strongly urges states that are considering laws that would permit
paternity disestablishment to adopt a very strict statute of limitations to
prevent harm to a child who has become emotionally attached to a parent.

Attorney Jennifer Brandt, a partner in the family law department at Cozen
O'Connor in Philadelphia, agrees.

"In a course of fairness, men should not be held accountable for payments of
child support, but you don't want to leave children fatherless, either," said
Brandt, who believes women have long had the upper hand in paternity disputes.

"But I think they're losing ground," said Brandt, adding that a growing number
of biological fathers are also waging their own war, fighting for a greater role
in their children's lives.

"It's all over the place," Brandt said of the so-called men's movement.

A NEW WRINKLE

Another new wrinkle in paternity disputes is men seeking reimbursement for child
support payments.

That's at the heart of a recent case in New Jersey, where a man recently won the
right to sue the biological father for nearly $110,000, the cost of raising the
child. RAC v. PJS, 380 N.J. Super. 94 (N.J. App. Div. Aug. 31, 2005).

The case involved a man who found out 30 years after his youngest child's birth
that he was not the father.

An appeals court ruled in September that the man could sue for reimbursement
because he had been duped. But Scott Bocker, attorney for the biological father,
said the mother should be held accountable because she duped the biological
father, too.

"His position has been it should be the mother, who lied to everybody, who
pays," said Bocker of the Law Offices of Herman Osofsky in Clifton, N.J.

He added that what is unusual about the case is that the plaintiff filed suit
using the state's Parentage Act, which historically was designed to let children
and mothers go after deadbeat dads for nonpayment.

The case has been appealed to the New Jersey Supreme Court.

"This is the first time the law has been used in this way by a third party,"
Bocker said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------



From: Doug Anderson on 10 Apr 2006 12:50
dg411(a)FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Andre Lieven) writes:

> http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1144414531354
>
> Paternity fraud is rampant in the United States, triggering legislation and
> legal challenges in more than a dozen states, according to family law attorneys
> and fathers' rights activists.

You misspelled: "according to people who are interested in twisting
statistics and playing gender politics for their own gain."
From: teachrmama on 10 Apr 2006 13:09

"Andre Lieven" <dg411(a)FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:e1e16b$bke$1(a)theodyn.ncf.ca...
> http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1144414531354
<snip>

> Another new wrinkle in paternity disputes is men seeking reimbursement for
> child
> support payments.
>
> That's at the heart of a recent case in New Jersey, where a man recently
> won the
> right to sue the biological father for nearly $110,000, the cost of
> raising the
> child. RAC v. PJS, 380 N.J. Super. 94 (N.J. App. Div. Aug. 31, 2005).
>
> The case involved a man who found out 30 years after his youngest child's
> birth
> that he was not the father.
>
> An appeals court ruled in September that the man could sue for
> reimbursement
> because he had been duped. But Scott Bocker, attorney for the biological
> father,
> said the mother should be held accountable because she duped the
> biological
> father, too.
>
> "His position has been it should be the mother, who lied to everybody, who
> pays," said Bocker of the Law Offices of Herman Osofsky in Clifton, N.J.

I absolutely agree!! Let the one who perpetrated the fraud pay the price
for the fraud!! That poor bio dad missed out on his child's entire
childhood--he deserves to be compensated for that loss--not sued! The lying
tramp of a woman deserves the lawsuit. Let *her* pay back what she stole
from the non-dad! And from the bio-dad, too!


>
> He added that what is unusual about the case is that the plaintiff filed
> suit
> using the state's Parentage Act, which historically was designed to let
> children
> and mothers go after deadbeat dads for nonpayment.
>
> The case has been appealed to the New Jersey Supreme Court.
>
> "This is the first time the law has been used in this way by a third
> party,"
> Bocker said.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>


--
NewsGuy.Com 30Gb $9.95 Carry Forward and On Demand Bandwidth
From: erin8380 on 10 Apr 2006 13:41
Here's an even more frightening fact. Did you know that in the state
of Oklahoma.....if a man acknowledges a child, as being his own.....and
later DNA testing concludes that the child is not his....he is STILL
RESPONSIBLE TO SUPPORT THAT CHILD....as he is the "only father the
child has ever known" I have a friend, who was married to a woman for
twelve years, and after the divorce, the woman confessed that the
oldest child may not be his....they did DNA testing, and the child was
not his son....the judge still ordered him to financially support that
child, as he was the only father figure the child had ever known. The
state would not pursue financial support from the alleged biological
father of the child, as this man had already acknowledged him as his
own son, by signing the birth certificate.

From: DB on 10 Apr 2006 13:41
> Michigan State University Law Professor Melanie Jacobs cautions states
> about
> passing new paternity-fraud laws, arguing children could get hurt in the
> long
> run.
>
> "I think the problem with those laws is that, No. 1, they need to consider
> a
> child's best interest. I'm not trying to minimize the trauma to the
> nonbiological father, his feeling of betrayal," Jacobs said.
>
> "But I can only imagine how traumatic it is for the child who learns that
> someone is not their father, and suddenly that father goes to court and
> says not
> only do I not want to pay for this child's [upbringing], I want to legally
> be
> declared the nonfather," Jacobs added.

There's nothing that says the man could not continue to act as a father, but
he could at least choose his amount of involvement with a child without an
over bearing government forcing their prescription of their ideas of how
much money they will force a man to surrender to a child's mother.







 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Marriage and the Silent Treatment?
Next: No Holidays for an Atheist