GetAwayFromMe said:

So everyone who has taken another stance is a fool...your own folly is astounding.....the money is for the child. and it should come from his father. Nobody is saying the child should not be supported. I was saying that the person who has responsibility should be made to come to the plate, and the "innocent" man who was manipulated should be able to walk away if he so chooses. I'll be damned if I would allow some trashy bitch to trap my son, lie to him, give a financial and emotional brain fuck and then make him pay for it....especially if he doesn't want to. Perhaps thats how your type operate, but I find it unconscionable for a tramp to pin somebody down like that.

As for the profane insults directed towards those who think differently from you, do you lack enough scruples and vocabulary to debate anything in an intelligent manner so that topics can go foward in the form of a healthy discussion where points of view are shared? Oh wait.....what am I thinking.....look who I'm talking to..... I already know you say mostly dumb shit and cant back it up.

Forget the adults. Imagine how that poor kid must feel... His life and world is gone as he knows it. He thinks his mother is a liar...the father he loved was a lie...his sperm donor is God-knows-where...his future is uncertain. Too sad.

Kids always have to bear the brunt of adult idiocracy.

StillGotIt said:

And yet another winning response. Bravo.You act as if the man's been wrongly convicted of a crime, and I find it disturbing that you view caring for another human being as some sort of punishment.

GetAwayFromMe said:

So everyone who has taken another stance is a fool...your own folly is astounding.....the money is for the child. and it should come from his father. Nobody is saying the child should not be supported. I was saying that the person who has responsibility should be made to come to the plate, and the "innocent" man who was manipulated should be able to walk away if he so chooses. I'll be damned if I would allow some trashy bitch to trap my son, lie to him, give a financial and emotional brain fuck and then make him pay for it....especially if he doesn't want to. Perhaps thats how your type operate, but I find it unconscionable for a tramp to pin somebody down like that.

As for the profane insults directed towards those who think differently from you, do you lack enough scruples and vocabulary to debate anything in an intelligent manner so that topics can go foward in the form of a healthy discussion where points of view are shared? Oh wait.....what am I thinking.....look who I'm talking to..... I already know you say mostly dumb shit and cant back it up.

The mothers character is certain.

The child?

The child!

Guilt by association. Suffers the misdeeds of the parent. Does the child deserve such disregard? A pawn in a destructive game. To be cast off as fodder of an adult novella.....


people taking sides, casting dispersions based on personal thoughts not devulged.

:the variation or scattering of data around some average or central value


The Child?

Is this FAIR?


Not The Father? You Still Owe Child Support, Says Georgia Law
Posted: 3:10 pm EDT May 13, 2009
Updated: 6:13 pm EDT May 13, 2009

ATLANTA -- Larry Durden, an unemployed mason worker, told Channel 2 Action News reporter Tom Regan that he is being threatened with jail time if he doesn’t continue paying child support for a child he says is not his biological son.

Durden, who says he is the victim of paternity fraud --- the act of falsely naming a man as the biological father of a child, said he assumed the boy was his son for 10 1/2 years.

"I mean, he looked like me. I thought he looked like me," said Durden.

But a few months ago, Durden said he started having doubts, and contacted a DNA testing lab. He took a paternity test and the results took him by surprise.

"It said "0"… he's not mine. So you know, that hurt … it grabbed me," said Durden.

Despite genetic evidence that Durden didn't father the boy, the state is forcing him to continue paying $500 a month in child support. And he's far from alone.

One of every three men who take a paternity test discovers a child they believed was theirs is not.

"They say 25 to 30 percent of all men who get tested find out that they're not the father," said family lawyer Randy Kessler. "That's a high number. Married, non-married, divorced ... that's going on a lot."

The state of Georgia can go after the men for child support and if they don't pay, the state can garnish their wages, revoke their driver's licenses and even put them behind bars.

"When you find out he's not your kid, it hurts because you still love him. But you don't want to pay child support for a kid that ain't yours when you got a family of your own to take care of," said Durden.

Kessler told Regan that he often deals with men who spend years raising a child under the false belief that it's their own.

"If a woman is having an affair, the last thing she wants to do as the child is being born is say, 'Uh, by the way, that baby you're holding in your arms may not be yours,'" said Kessler.

Kessler represented Carnell Smith, who became one of the leaders in the war on paternity fraud.

Smith's battle began with a call from an ex-girlfriend who said he was the father of her baby girl.

"I believed the child was mine, she said the child was mine, and it took me 11 years to find out that was absolutely not the truth," said.

Smith challenged the child support decree, and personally took the case all the way to U.S. Supreme Court.

The high court refused to hear it, but his well-publicized crusade led Georgia to reshape its paternity law.

Ex-husbands and out-of-wedlock fathers can petition to end child support through DNA evidence. But there's a catch.

"If you don't file it exactly as it is written, you don't avail yourself to the relief."

"The law makes it a little easier to quote "get off the hook" for the obligation, but you still have to do it right," said Kessler.

One of the rules requires anyone fighting child support to file a challenge within three months of finding out they are not the biological father. Missing that deadline could hurt their case.

"If you don't do it within 90 days, the court is still allowed to give you relief. It is permissive relief, but it's a case-by-case decision and it's up to the judge."

A judge will hear Durden’s case in June. He hopes to get more sympathy in court than what he's received from the county authorities. They threatened to throw him in jail if he doesn't pay them more than $1,000 in back child support -- for a child that isn't his own.

"I'm falling behind on my bills because I got to pay for a kid that's not even mine. It's crazy."

The man in the article is being financially punished for having tried to do the right thing. If you note in the article, it is child support--not love. You seem as if you are equating the two. I doubt that the child would be upset if the name on the check changes to his biological father.

Forget the adults. Imagine how that poor kid must feel... His life and world is gone as he knows it. He thinks his mother is a liar...the father he loved was a lie...his sperm donor is God-knows-where...his future is uncertain. Too sad.

Kids always have to bear the brunt of adult idiocracy.

The man in the article is being financially punished for having tried to do the right thing. If you note in the article, it is child support--not love. You seem as if you are equating the two. I doubt that the child would be upset if the name on the check changes to his biological father.

The law should be followed wherein it requires a biological father to support their childen. The law was created to not only provide for the child, but to protect the financial interests of the parents. Otherwise, this stuff could just run rampant, skanks running the streets pointing at anyone and forcing child support payments.

And what about this childs right to know his/her biological father, brothers and sisters? What if that biological father has been denied the chance to know of this child's existence because mommy liked the dude with the bigger paycheck more? Your inexperience in life wouldn't afford you the aiblity to consider all of the angles and legal implications this case has. This money was stolen from this man by the childs mother, and so far the courts are sanctioning it. His caring for the child is not a "crime". The fact that he was swindled into doing it is. That he is being made to continue is legally alarming. There is likely a violation of this man's constitutional rights as well. He is being oppressed....yes I said it OPPRESSED....not by the child, but by the courts because they are not permitting him the choices he is legally entitled to. If you believe its okay to tamper with constitutional rights sweety, you really need to educate yourself more.

Lots of well meaning folks here who are worried about this child. Why don't you guys make the payments?

StillGotIt said:

The error in your argument is the fact that he has already taken on the role of "father". You'd be ok with him abandoning his position? How would the child take it? Do you even give a shit? Probably not, because you're too focused on the financial aspect of the case. EACH PARTY has a responsibility in this. Not just the "trashy bitch tramp", as you so eloquently called her.

My profane insults? Using the big 'ol FU isn't profane? And I do believe you used it against someone who didn't agree with your point of view. What an
[Name calling snip - luv4u]you are. Hypocritical to the bone and can't even see it.

I'd hate to be your grandchild, knowing that you'd abandon me if you found out that I wasn't related to you by blood, but had helped raise me my entire life. That, to me, shows your absolute lack of humanity and morals. It's all about the money to some of you.

Graycap23 said:

I say this: He's loved and bonded with this kid for almost 11 years. The mother was wrong for not being upfront about this whole situation, and has destroyed two lives. Don't make two wrongs a right by bowing out of the kid's life. He should continue his role as a father, honestly. If the kid meets his biological father down the line, so be it and the kid will never forget the true father that raised him.

angel345 said:

The role of "father" is not about money. He can still be a father to that child without having to fork over cash. The money he is being sued for should be reimbursed to him. The mom is making it so that step-dad will pull away from this child because she is making it hard on their relationship in general.

So if this man that was a father figure to this child (were they married? and that IF dude even show love in the first place?) did want to continue a relationship he would have a harder time doing so because of her greed and insistence on dragging dad to court putting a strain on their relationship.
[Edited 5/17/09 12:40pm]

paintedlady said:

And, how do we KNOW that he's loved and bonded with this child all these years? Does it SAY that in the story, even if it does, how do we know that's true? How do ya'll know he's a good father figure to begin with or if he was just sending checks but not interacting with the child at all? See what I mean about all the assumptions being made in here.

SCNDLS said:

I was hinting that myself before when I responded to Threaddy... but I had to repeat.... you get it though. Sharp mind, ya never miss a beat.

The point is that a court shouldn't force payment when the funds are not there, even if the "care" may go beyond money, and financial care may very well resume once he is on his feet, but let the man decide.

Everyone talking about how the child may suffer needs to remind themselves of how the father's other children may suffer as well while he is unemployed and forced to hand over $500. That's where everyone saying "punishment" comes in. $500 isn't easy to scrape up every month for one child when you are out of work.

I think it should be voluntary not obligatory.

The point is that a court shouldn't force payment when the funds are not there, even if the "care" may go beyond money, and financial care may very well resume once he is on his feet, but let the man decide.

Everyone talking about how the child may suffer needs to remind themselves of how the father's other children may suffer as well while he is unemployed and forced to hand over $500. That's where everyone saying "punishment" comes in. $500 isn't easy to scrape up every month for one child when you are out of work.

I think it should be voluntary not obligatory.

Cinnie said:

Well, he shouldn't have had those other kids since he was paying for THIS one already.

I say this: He's loved and bonded with this kid for almost 11 years. The mother was wrong for not being upfront about this whole situation, and has destroyed two lives. Don't make two wrongs a right by bowing out of the kid's life. He should continue his role as a father, honestly. If the kid meets his biological father down the line, so be it and the kid will never forget the true father that raised him.

angel345 said:

It's not right that the kid should be punished for the mistakes of adults. He didn't ask for his mother to cheat and lie. However he got here, someone needs to step up and act like the adult they claim to be and put him first.

SCNDLS said:

I think the bigger "shouldn't" would be the mother "shouldn't" have told him the first one was his, if we want to squabble.

But lets not forget this story isn't about a single bachelor finding out he was not the father... he is raising other children too.

So if we are really thinking about "the children", let's remember that $500 could be food coming off of their plates.

In this specific case! That's all I'm sayin'!

Cinnie said:

I agree. But earlier somebody made the argument that he shouldn't bring more kids into the world if he couldn't afford to take care of this one that ain't even his.

meow85 said:

And what about the man's family? He is out of work and has to scrape up $500 for one child, while he has other mouths to feed. Are you forgetting about those other children's needs?

I don't think the man should walk out of the 11 year old's life, but love doesn't require $500 monthly payments (while one is unemployed).

Kids need love, yeah. But kids also need food on the table.

He is out of work and has to scrape up $500 for one child, while he has other mouths to feed. Are you forgetting about those other children's needs?

What if the mother isn't herself in a position financially to care for the kid on her own?

should [s]he have started another family if [s]he couldn't really afford it?

meow85 said:

meow85 said:

Cinnie said:

Again, you're sticking this all back on the mother. Regardless of what you think of her behaviour, someone needs to support that kid -emotionally AND financially. Who's supposed to do it? The State won't, for whatever reason the birth father is unknown or can't be found, presumably the mother isn't able to.