If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Denver Channel)   Colorado man forced to pay child support for chldren that DNA tests prove are not his   ( thedenverchannel.com) divider line
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

6629 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Jan 2002 at 11:04 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

63 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

2002-01-31 11:06:03 PM  
Did they test fb- ?
2002-01-31 11:09:21 PM  
What's with the new obsession with The Denver Channel?
2002-01-31 11:09:44 PM  
2002-01-31 11:10:12 PM  
This is seriously farked up; who gives a damn about whether the limit for contesting paternity has passed. If he ain't the dad, let him keep the green. Track down whomever she dallied with while he was fighting to keep Sodamn Insane (Saddam Hussein if you prefer) in his place!
2002-01-31 11:10:20 PM  
Colorado = Very 'female friendly' jurisprudence wise.

Check the poll on the page. 91% of the women and 92% of the men say this guy shouldn't have to pay. We'll see.
2002-01-31 11:11:20 PM  
Sounds like the sperm donor who had to pay child support for the kid the two dykes had.

FoamingPipeSnake: The only thing Fb- has ever done anything sexual with is his hand.
2002-01-31 11:12:43 PM  
Why doesn't he just stop paying? If the whore of an ex-wife has the gall to sue, he can just kill her.

It's a law...somewhere.
2002-01-31 11:12:44 PM  
Will somebody please think of the children!
2002-01-31 11:14:09 PM  
Dude, your get'n a child support check.

That poor bastard.
2002-01-31 11:16:10 PM  
Is it just me or did anyone else also notice the crappy journalism? I mean... the article seems to be written by a 3rd grader...
2002-01-31 11:16:44 PM  
Maybe an e-bonics prayer will help:

Muh nubian, Dat Be In Heaven,
Chillin' Be Thy Name, Yo.
I Get Me Some, My Ho' Is Fun,
On Foot Toward 7-11.
Gimmie Some Loot, Or I'll Shoot You Dead,
and Give Out Some Guest Passes, As We Go To Shows,
Via The Bus, & Troop Us Not Into Temptation,
But Deliver Us From Whitey,
2002-01-31 11:18:07 PM  
All these Tyson and Fb- related threads make me demand the two fight out on International Waters for a title belt. Of course, we can't afford a real gold belt, so we'll take out some Texan and steal his giant buckle.

$39.99 on all major pirate networks!
2002-01-31 11:19:34 PM  
This is why I will never trust any koont as far as I can throw them.

...and with my bad back I shouldn't be throwing anybody.
2002-01-31 11:20:09 PM  
You know, this sort of shiat drives me completely insane.
Dylan said he now knows the twins were conceived while he served in the Navy during the Gulf War.
Yeah, she kept the homefires burning allright.
But despite proof he's not the dad, Colorado law and legal technicalities require him to write a child support check every month for the next 12 years.
It's so charming to see the government taking care of their own.
It's not like he was out defending the country or anything.

Damn, and how short was that war? She certainly didn't waste any time.
2002-01-31 11:20:33 PM  
If the DNA don't fit...
2002-01-31 11:22:44 PM  
"Alright, thanks for letting me screw your best friend while you were away, that'll be $120,000."
2002-01-31 11:23:28 PM  
Damn. alright.
2002-01-31 11:26:01 PM  
Sucky law, simple solution: Duhdie should (confidentially) request the paternity test when the kids are born, for any reason at all (or none).

That should keep those biatch ho's at home instead of Farking around.
2002-01-31 11:29:26 PM  
greedy biatch
2002-01-31 11:31:12 PM  
Do you know, I think I have to side with the law on this one. If you have a question of paternity, check it. Otherwise, it isn't fair to the children to yank their lives out from under them. Statutes of limitations do a lot of good. 5 years is a sizeable time to have a "rumor" surface.
2002-01-31 11:31:15 PM  
[image from shirtisdumb.com too old to be available]
2002-01-31 11:35:31 PM  
I've read about this problem before. The courts thinking is that if the guy stops paying child support, then it's the children who suffer, and the fact that their mother commited fraud is not their fault. Divorce courts like to think that the welfare of the children come first. Stupid, but that's how they think. However, with DNA tests becoming so inexpensive, there are more and more cases like this showing up, and the courts are being forced to rethink their position.

The obvious solution in cases where the ex-husband can afford the support payments is to require the ex-husband to lend the mother a monthly amount to support the children, which the mother is required to pay back (with full interest at the going rate) when the child reaches 18., or she remarries. Failure to repay this loan (which in Dylan's case would be around $300,000) would bring the same penalties that deadbeat dads face, i.e. forfiture of property, attachment of wages, etc. And any guy foolish enough to marry her would find she comes with a debt. And the kids would still eat.

But, that would be way to fair for family court. So, nevermind.
2002-01-31 11:38:17 PM  
The sad fact is, if he fought for visitation rights, he wouldnt win due to the fact that he isint the sperm donor,so should he wish to see them the biatch wins.

Always have prenups, if either party doesnt think divorce is eventual they shouldnt mind signing. Just make it fair.
2002-01-31 11:40:28 PM  
She's a s.hitbag, plain and simple.
2002-01-31 11:42:34 PM  
Itz tha btichez that'll getchaz!!
2002-01-31 11:47:38 PM  
Gerald Miscovich is the poster non-dad for this cause. He has brown eyes, his ex has brown eyes, and his kid has blue eyes, which is almost impossible. He didn't know that 'til someone told him two years after the divorce. She's remarried, and he's still paying child support.

There's a story here or you can just put Gerald Miscovich into google and read much, much ranting on the subject.
2002-01-31 11:50:26 PM  
Gotta love it, unfaithful women get handed alimony checks and child support from their ex. Unfaithful men hand alimony checks and child support to their ex wives. Anyone else see something wrong with this picture?
2002-01-31 11:56:15 PM  
This is utter bullshiat. If they're not his kids, he shouldn't be forced to pay for child support. If he paid it voluntarily out of concern for the children's welfare that would be one thing, but to use the law to FORCE a man to pay for the upkeep of children that aren't his is farking WRONG and she should be charged with fraud. Worthless, cheating coonts like this piece of shiat female give women a bad name.
2002-01-31 11:58:15 PM  
Can you say "double standard"?

(I knew you could.)
2002-02-01 12:03:44 AM  
Yah, Doofus, you'd think there would be a civil suit in there somewhere, based on the fact that she caused him harm through welping pups with intent to defraud.

Of course, her defense would be; "But Yer honer, I thought they were his!" Yah, proving intent would be hard. Of course, in civil court, you only need a preponderance of evadence, not proof beyond a resonable doubt.

Man, Love Stinks!
2002-02-01 12:06:06 AM  
Actually, it's very possible for two brown-eyed parents to have blue-eyed children. It is almost impossible, however, for two blue-eyed parents to have brown-eyed children, unless they both have some odd allele mutation. IIRC, both parents had blue eyes and the twins had brown eyes... but don't quote me on it.
2002-02-01 12:07:50 AM  
If the guy knows who the real father is, what's to stop him from suing bio-dad to recover the child support he's being forced to pay? Can you subpoena DNA yet?
2002-02-01 12:10:06 AM  
Am I the only person here that would kick the living sh!t outta her?
2002-02-01 12:10:43 AM  
You're right, Kamesennin, the wired article has it backwards.
2002-02-01 12:21:35 AM  
SpaceBass: If the guy knows who the real father is, what's to stop him from suing bio-dad to recover the child support he's being forced to pay?

And if the mother won't identify the real father, than sue her for witholding the information...

This is wacky: Some ambulance chasers have a how-to page for this sort of thing.

Their main page, paternityfraud.com, got hit with the ugly-fruit-salad stick. Don't go there.
2002-02-01 12:23:20 AM  
Damn, the paternityfraud.com guys claim they actually trademarked the phrase "If the Genes don't fit, you must acquit! (tm)"
2002-02-01 12:37:48 AM  
God I hate this. It used to be only the father that would get the rewards for a divorse court, now it's the mother. Fer frank's sake, look at the evidence and interpret correctly.
2002-02-01 01:01:28 AM  
Sorry, add balance. Women and men fark up an equal amount in child care and such.
2002-02-01 01:20:47 AM  
"Citizens Against Paternity Fraud"

Who exactly is the fraudulant one?
2002-02-01 01:22:21 AM  
This just goes to prove my theory about the whole continuing women's rights movement.

They don't want EQUALITY. They want SUPERIORITY.

They figure "Women have been oppressed for thousands of years! Now it's payback time!" despite the fact that no woman or man has been around that long. Now women are holding all the damn cards: reproduction, judiciary, household, etc. Soon they will have full control of the government. Anyone see that Episode of ST:TNG where they had to rescue a freighter captain from the "Planet of the Manhaters"? Except then one of the women leader people got freaky with Riker and their evil scheme to vaporive the freighter dude went right out the window.

As I see it, equality is fine. If a guy cheats on his wife and leaves her in the gutter, make him pay out the damn nose. But if a woman has another guy's kids and then has the non-dad pay for part of their upbringing, make HER (and the bio-dad) pay back every cent. I'm tired of biatchy women turning everything into a gender relations case.

She did the crime, now make her pay the farking money.
2002-02-01 01:41:59 AM  
It is farking 6 years after the fact though. If he had a problem he should have acted earlier. Even if he's not the biological father, after 6 years he has to be emotionally their father.

It sounds like he got the test done after the divorce as a big fark you to his wife. And he wants to punish her. She deserves punishment for being a skank whore, but that's not the way to do it.

What's the law with regard to step-fathers and child support? If a chick with kids gets married, she stops getting child support from the natural father, but what happens if whe divorces the new husband. Does he have to pay maintenance because he accepted the responsibility of the children by marrying the woman, or does the burden go back to the natural father?
2002-02-01 01:58:32 AM  
Think again Rakshasa All I want is equal pay.
This woman is a dumbass, and I do not understand the judges ruling. What is she using as a defense? Lazy sperm? He was overseas for God's sake.
So check yorself 'for you stereotype.
2002-02-01 02:00:34 AM  
This thing is really farking wierd....if the guy is NOT the dad then he should not pay, no matter how long it took to find this out. There should b no statute of limitations on DNA testing and paternity. If it is found out that the 'mother' has committed fraud, go after her and her pocketbook, and the 'sperm donor' too. Whether he took the test to spite her or not makes no nevermind. In my field, I have seen men and women do things just to spite the significant other. AS long as it is within the bounds of the law, they can do things in most instances.

A simple paternity test at the beiginning, right before/when the order is placed for child support would definitely solve this issue and insure it never happens again.
2002-02-01 08:16:21 AM  
This is old news. The Mass supreme court already made one of these idiotic decisions. Couldn't have hurt that the chief justace was a woman.
2002-02-01 08:22:20 AM  
All this crap is why I avoid women. Sex is fun, but not 18 years in slavery fun. Nothing is that fun. I have never met a trustworthy woman and doubt that I ever will. Bunch of money grabbing cheating lying crazy emotional basketcases.
2002-02-01 08:36:47 AM  
This is not anything new in Michigan, anyway. Fair or not fair, good or bad, it is the law in either case. As such, I believe that if people (both male and female) are aware of this sort of complication being a very real possibility it might just increase the level of seriousness with which people approach their intimate relationships. I think that this is what the government is hoping will happen anyway, and so I would not look for these laws to change any time soon.
2002-02-01 08:52:48 AM  
I don't know how an individual could turn his back on his children like this. Lots of people have adopted children or rear children that are not biologically their own and if a divorce happens they continue to support the child. Sometimes moral responsibility and the law do not coincide. In this case not only is it his legal responsibility to support his children it is his moral responsibility. Things like this have gone on for thousands of years.
2002-02-01 09:38:37 AM  
The issue is NOT him turning his back on them... The man got screwed royally. I know the children's best interests are primary here, but look at it through the man's eyes. You've just spent the last six years loving, raising and caring for children that were concieved by another man. When he looks at those kids, he doesn't see his two kids anymore, he sees a reminder that his biatch of a waste of skin wife cheated on him.

HE should not be paying support. The real father should be, and the real father should be repaying him for all the years he raised his kids.

To hold this man accountable for the next 12 years is NEITHER morally or legally correct. Its a crime.
2002-02-01 09:42:04 AM  
Farkeater, they're not HIS children. Excuse me, I don't see that he has a moral resposibility to support these children. She had a moral responsibility not to fark around and get pregnant by another man while he was overseas fighting for his country for god's sake. Where's her goddamned MORAL responsibility when she's bilking her ex husband for child support for kids that aren't even his?
Like I said, if he voluntarily offered to support these children that's one thing, but being forced to financially support kids that aren't his is WRONG. Don't talk to me about moral resposibility when he and the children are the victims of his wifes inability to keep her goddamned legs shut.
2002-02-01 10:09:21 AM  
Simple solution. Don't pay.

Then get brought before the court to explain yourself and present the evidence. Loose. Continue not to pay. Go to jail. Appeal to a higher court, hope it gets overturned. If not get out of jail and leave the country.
Displayed 50 of 63 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.