Irony - 01/11/11 09:45 PM
Does anyone think it's somewhat ironic that a BH would ever advocate for the paternity rights of an OM?
I'm all for men's rights but as far as the BS in wanthealing's thread I would draw the line at being concerned about anything that the OM may want or desire. But everything changes if the woman were to be single in which I believe the law should be changed - I will elaborate below.
I also believe that it�s pretty ironic that a law frequently used to enforce a child support judgment upon a non-biological father, simply for being duped successfully by a WW, is also being used to justify denying a biological father access to his biological child.
When a man discovers too late that he is a victim of paternity fraud committed by a STBXWW, he is made to continue child support because he represented himself as the father, but is often denied custody or visitation because he is not the biological father. Of course, all the feminist groups cry out in alarm against paternity fraud being made a chargeable offense and against men being able to escape financial obligation for another man�s child. They say we have to have the best interests of the child at heart, which to them means money, after all who really needs a man, right? But why can�t the law be changed so that a non-biological father in this situation maintain contact with the kid(s) and still have the WW and the OM pay the child support? That way the kid(s) still have the father they�ve always known and the right people get targeted for the actual support? Have the cheating wife help pay for the children that she lied about, what a novel concept! In the cases where the poor sap has been paying child support for years, I think that he should continue to be the father but that the cheating wife and the OM be made to repay the child support equally to the guy.
The principal of paternity estoppel is a legal concept that needs to go away. What if wanthealing never told her husband that the child wasn�t his? That very same concept everyone is quoting would be used to screw him over big time if he would have discovered it later and wanted a divorce. We now have the technology to be able to prove with 100% accuracy who is the putative father. I think that ALL live births should be tested for DNA confirmation of paternity. What conceivable argument could you have against it other than current cost, which will go down once the volume of testing goes up? Feminist groups would be up in arms against this, and of course, a lot of wives would say that it�s a matter of trust and that they wouldn�t do it, which is why it should be mandatory. Two most expensive words in the English language � trust me. It would nip the old paternity fraud right in the bud, especially the daddy shoppers who use faulty court notification procedures to snare unknowing men.
A man�s choice about children and being a father actually ends once he ejaculates inside a female and she gets pregnant. If she wants to keep the child, he gets to pay for the next 18 years with no say and probably doesn�t see the kid all that much, especially if they don�t marry and he later becomes an inconvenience once she moves on to someone else. If she wants to have an abortion, he has no say in the matter. If she wants to have the child but give it up for adoption, most states allow for her to hide the fact that she is pregnant or denies the putative father a chance to claim his own child. The state doesn�t really care about a man�s right to have a fair degree of participation or involvement in his children�s lives, it just cares about someone with the XY arrangement paying the money. And since most states that have a centralized child support enforcement agency that gets federal dollars for making sure payments get collected, and since men are overwhelmingly the ones usually with the most money, don�t you think it�s a huge ethical issue about the state being the one who makes the custody percentage determinations? Don't even get me started about deadbeat dads - the overwhelming majority of men make their CS payments, I would be curious what the deadbeat rate is for the small minority of women CS payers.
Do away with estoppel, make paternity testing mandatory, and repeal no fault divorce laws. Would dramatically change the social landscape of our country.
I'm all for men's rights but as far as the BS in wanthealing's thread I would draw the line at being concerned about anything that the OM may want or desire. But everything changes if the woman were to be single in which I believe the law should be changed - I will elaborate below.
I also believe that it�s pretty ironic that a law frequently used to enforce a child support judgment upon a non-biological father, simply for being duped successfully by a WW, is also being used to justify denying a biological father access to his biological child.
When a man discovers too late that he is a victim of paternity fraud committed by a STBXWW, he is made to continue child support because he represented himself as the father, but is often denied custody or visitation because he is not the biological father. Of course, all the feminist groups cry out in alarm against paternity fraud being made a chargeable offense and against men being able to escape financial obligation for another man�s child. They say we have to have the best interests of the child at heart, which to them means money, after all who really needs a man, right? But why can�t the law be changed so that a non-biological father in this situation maintain contact with the kid(s) and still have the WW and the OM pay the child support? That way the kid(s) still have the father they�ve always known and the right people get targeted for the actual support? Have the cheating wife help pay for the children that she lied about, what a novel concept! In the cases where the poor sap has been paying child support for years, I think that he should continue to be the father but that the cheating wife and the OM be made to repay the child support equally to the guy.
The principal of paternity estoppel is a legal concept that needs to go away. What if wanthealing never told her husband that the child wasn�t his? That very same concept everyone is quoting would be used to screw him over big time if he would have discovered it later and wanted a divorce. We now have the technology to be able to prove with 100% accuracy who is the putative father. I think that ALL live births should be tested for DNA confirmation of paternity. What conceivable argument could you have against it other than current cost, which will go down once the volume of testing goes up? Feminist groups would be up in arms against this, and of course, a lot of wives would say that it�s a matter of trust and that they wouldn�t do it, which is why it should be mandatory. Two most expensive words in the English language � trust me. It would nip the old paternity fraud right in the bud, especially the daddy shoppers who use faulty court notification procedures to snare unknowing men.
A man�s choice about children and being a father actually ends once he ejaculates inside a female and she gets pregnant. If she wants to keep the child, he gets to pay for the next 18 years with no say and probably doesn�t see the kid all that much, especially if they don�t marry and he later becomes an inconvenience once she moves on to someone else. If she wants to have an abortion, he has no say in the matter. If she wants to have the child but give it up for adoption, most states allow for her to hide the fact that she is pregnant or denies the putative father a chance to claim his own child. The state doesn�t really care about a man�s right to have a fair degree of participation or involvement in his children�s lives, it just cares about someone with the XY arrangement paying the money. And since most states that have a centralized child support enforcement agency that gets federal dollars for making sure payments get collected, and since men are overwhelmingly the ones usually with the most money, don�t you think it�s a huge ethical issue about the state being the one who makes the custody percentage determinations? Don't even get me started about deadbeat dads - the overwhelming majority of men make their CS payments, I would be curious what the deadbeat rate is for the small minority of women CS payers.
Do away with estoppel, make paternity testing mandatory, and repeal no fault divorce laws. Would dramatically change the social landscape of our country.