Every time I read one of these stories (about 1-2 a year here in NJ) it pisses me off to no end. How can this happen? It seems absolutely unfair. Your thoughts?

Hunterdon man loses appeal to cut child support

by Ralph Ortega/The Star-Ledger Thursday January 24, 2008, 4:14 PM

A Hunterdon County man who discovered he was not the father of a 10-year-old girl, was denied his appeal to lower his child support payments, according to an opinion handed down this week by the state Appellate Division.

An appeals court on Wednesday affirmed an October 2006 decision made by state Superior Court Judge Stephen Rubin in Flemington against the request made by the man, identified in court papers only as W.S.Y. Jr. to protect the child's identity.

W.S.Y. claimed that a paternity test proved he was not the biological father of the child, whom he thought he had conceived with his then wife.

He went before Rubin seeking disclosure of the identity of the child's real father, appointment of a mental health counselor to address paternity issues, and reduced child support, including reimbursement for support previously paid retroactive to the child's birth.

The opinion, referring to the child by her initials, F.Y., states that the appeals panel was satisfied with the way Rubin made his decision against the requests. The judge "conducted a thorough analysis of the appropriate best interest factors and concluded, by clear and convincing evidence, that the issue of paternity at this point in F.Y.'s life is not in her best interests."

W.S.Y's attorney was not immediately available for comment.

I'm not sure you really want my views. I actually think it would depend more on the circumstances. Just because someone is not the biological father to me does not automatically preclude them from the responsibility of child support. In the very story you mentioned he (and the girl) spent the last 10 years believing he was the father. It does not say how long after she was born that he divorced the mother but presumably he has spent many if not all of those years loving and raising her as his own. So why should the fact that he has found out now that he is not the biological father give him the right to a "refund"? If a man & wife adopt a child and they divorce isn't the non-custodial parent still liable to help with child support despite the lack of DNA?

Now if you had said that they had divorced around the time of the pregnancy 10 years ago amid suspicions over the paternity and that he had never assumed a parental role emotionally or psychologically (spell?) then I might say he had some justification for not wanting to pay further child support and if he could show intentional fraud on the ex-wife's part I could see some room for him to sue for the child-support he already paid.

I'm not sure you really want my views. I actually think it would depend more on the circumstances. Just because someone is not the biological father to me does not automatically preclude them from the responsibility of child support. In the very story you mentioned he (and the girl) spent the last 10 years believing he was the father. It does not say how long after she was born that he divorced the mother but presumably he has spent many if not all of those years loving and raising her as his own. So why should the fact that he has found out now that he is not the biological father give him the right to a "refund"? If a man & wife adopt a child and they divorce isn't the non-custodial parent still liable to help with child support despite the lack of DNA?

Now if you had said that they had divorced around the time of the pregnancy 10 years ago amid suspicions over the paternity and that he had never assumed a parental role emotionally or psychologically (spell?) then I might say he had some justification for not wanting to pay further child support and if he could show intentional fraud on the ex-wife's part I could see some room for him to sue for the child-support he already paid.

Ditto. If he's spent that many years raising the child as his own, and the child thinks of him as her father, he is her father, regardless of DNA. I can definitely see where the judge is coming from. On the other hand, I do understand where the father is coming from. He feels betrayed by his former wife, rightfully so. But, IMO, he should also be thinking of what's best for the little girl that he thought of and raised as his daughter, not trying to stick it to his ex-wife.

It is all about the kid and what is in her best interest. I doubt if any rational person would conclude that being raised in poverty would be in her best interest. Married fathers are always presumed to be the father of any child that comes from a marrage.

It isn't exactly like returning some pajamas for a refund. Ya, I agree that is sucks for the man to find out that his wife was sleeping around and that he was duped. However, the girl is the innocent party in all of this and she should not be punished.

I am sure that his name is on the birth certificate as the father and if he can turn off his love for this girl because she is not biologically his, then I don't feel on bit sorry for him.

Just think how many men never help support their children in any way and get away with it. Shouldn't we feel just as outraged for the mother and child in these situations.

Life is not always fair, but not supporting a child that grew up believing she had a daddy is not fair either.

It is only money and it will end when she is 18

Depending on the circumstances, the appeal might have gone better if he hadn't asked for a refund of the back child support. Although I wonder why he only asked for reduced child support.

Are there any more links regarding this family that maybe have more background detail?

To Chime in, I think he should have gone after the mother for finacial restitution because after reading this case for some time now, I believe she defrauded the "Dad". I think she knew full well he was not the father all along.

He accepted that the girl was his, financial obligation should follow - so should his love & affection...not just his wallet.

Your right Phyllis, life is not fair - it's especially not when the Family Law for most of the US is one sided, specifically towards the mother. I realize there are many single mothers who have dead beat fathers for their children, and that is what gets the majority of attention. It is a shame, it is a crime - but so is fraud.

What's not reported, is the father's who have little to no rights when entering into Family Court.

I'll admit, I'm more than biased - I have 2 close men in my life that have spent nothing more than a small fortune to have the bare minimum of access to their children.

I realize my instances are the minority compared to the thousands of woman who are struggling to make ends meat being a single mom, with no support.

I am also a strong advocate for Father for Equal Rights - and this is a case among many that I encounter each day.

Net / Net - The child should never suffer, but "maybe" it wasn't just the "Dad" in this issue .... Maybe the "Mom" should bear some responsibility for her part...My 2cents

I dont understand why the judge did not insist that the Mom disclose the name of the "baby daddy" that way, she can get child support from him, and reimburse her poor ex husband !!

From what I've been told, even if child support is overpaid (by way of garnished wages when checks are also being sent, or whatever), the parent caring for the child wont be required to pay the money back, because that could put the child in a position of suffering. IE; even if this guy gets out of paying child support, he will probably never be reimbursed, because the money was for the good of the child, and creating that kind of debt for the mother is NOT for the good of the child. Maybe they should do something in a way of deferred debt... like she owes it, but isn't required to pay (and therefore doesn't affect her credit) until the child is 18?

Now, if I was that guy, and I was forced to pay child support for a kid that wasn't mind, AND I had not been in the child's life really as their "dad" or whatever, I'd be hunting down the child's real father so he can be made to pay support going forward. Assuming the woman even knows who it is.

Maybe they should do something in a way of deferred debt... like she owes it, but isn't required to pay (and therefore doesn't affect her credit) until the child is 18?

I think that is an extremely fair settlement.

I also like the deferred debt idea, at least for situations where the man can show some intent to defraud on the woman's part. I even see no problem in sueing the woman for additional "hard-ship" damages beyond what was paid in child support if and only if they can proof willfull intent to fraud. My problem with this when there is a lack of proof of intentional fraud still comes back to the idea if the child has though this person was their father for years (long enough to know what is going on not just an infant) and the man has been taking emotional responsibility for this child in addition to the financial responsibility, then I have a harder time with justifying the emotional trauma these cases will add to the child. I can understand hating the woman and wanting to punish her but how can he just stop loving the child like its just some light switch to be turned off?

I also like the idea that the man no matter the situation could track down and sue the biological father for reimbursement of those back payments.

My husband's best friend married a woman that claimed to be pregnant with his chlid even though they had broken up several months earlier. Several years later they divorced and after the divorce he found out that his 3 year old son that he had been devoted to even more so than the mother wasn't his biologically. Once he found that out he never saw the child again or supported it in any way. I had understood his desire not to give his ex-wife any money but it always bothered me that he was able to so easily abandon the 3-year old boy that had loved him unconditionally. was

From what I've been told, even if child support is overpaid (by way of garnished wages when checks are also being sent, or whatever), the parent caring for the child wont be required to pay the money back, because that could put the child in a position of suffering. IE; even if this guy gets out of paying child support, he will probably never be reimbursed, because the money was for the good of the child, and creating that kind of debt for the mother is NOT for the good of the child. Maybe they should do something in a way of deferred debt... like she owes it, but isn't required to pay (and therefore doesn't affect her credit) until the child is 18?

Now, if I was that guy, and I was forced to pay child support for a kid that wasn't mind, AND I had not been in the child's life really as their "dad" or whatever, I'd be hunting down the child's real father so he can be made to pay support going forward. Assuming the woman even knows who it is.

Totally true in Colorado--we opted to have my DH's child support taken directly from the check--at the same time they were supposed to put the remainder into the bank account, and they inverted the boxes. Had all of his check except the CS amount sent to her, and his CS put in our account. Went on for 6 weeks--3 payments. We were NEVER credited or allowed to withhold the equal amount. His ex just got a bonus! We DID finally get the bank to settle with us, concerning some checks they bounced before we figured out the goof-but nothing in court come of it...nothing!

The boy who grew up right next door to me, same age as my oldest DD, come home while in his last year of high school, and informed his folks that his GF was pregnant. He quit high school, went to work waiting tables at Red Lobster, paid all of the girls bills, was with her the entire time. Was present at the birth. Went to the hospital the next day with the car seat, and ran into her leaving with her Mom, and she told him then the baby was not his. He mourned this child. Then within a month she sued for child support. They demanded a paternity test, and no the baby is not his. But the judge believed he set precedence in assuming the child to be his, he supported the mother, and now is required to pay over $580.00 a month, and he is not granted any visitation at all! He has taken it back to court, and is currently waiting to get a court date on the appeal.

His attorney told him he really shot himself in the foot by getting his GED, and being promoted within the company---it would have been better if he too were still struggling.

When we went through it all our attorney told us not to look for justice, it is an unjust world we live in. Great huh?

Kat

It really is a terrible situation for this man to be in. I feel bad for him but at the same time I have to say it is not this little girl's fault. And I can't believe after 10 years he is just ready to abandon her-makes me wonder if he really loved her at all. I think the justice system is really backward in this country. My sister sued her ex boyfriend for child support(they were both teenagers) and a state required paternity test was done and of course the child was proven to be his and he was ordered to pay her a big $50 a month in child support...yes that is FIFTY DOLLARS PER MONTH. $50 per month won't buy enough diapers and wipes to last the month and wont even put a dent in the cost of formula.

Most states anymore have a formula they use, it is the same for everyone. It enters how much each parent makes, who is responsible for insurance, day care, and other child related expenses if there are any, figures that in, and then supposedly equalizes things.

There are however things that do not get figured in...such as other child support received!

My son pays child support from his first marriage, his ex wife has 3 kids by 3 different men, and recieves CS from all 3, and maintenance from 2 of them. As it stands right now, she gets $2100.00 a month from the guys, and is receiving a Pell grant to go to school, and qualifies for it, as a single mom, and it overpays her local community college tuition and books by as much as $2500.00 per semester. She does not have to work. She likely won't for many years to come. I can only hope she is being a good mom for my granddaughter....

Kat

I'm under the impression that a formula is used in most states as well - based on income. $50 is insane, I can't even feed my animals on that amt per month, Heather I'd advised your sister to continually petition the court to ask for more. Just because they were teenagers at the time, does not mean she can not receive more over the years as the father's income increases (unless he remains at the same level of income).

My oldest brother has 4 kids with his ex, and raised her daughter before they met as his. Her biological father was not really in the picture - but didn't allow for an adoption to take place (ps - he paid no child support, but did have visitation once a yr, *he lived out of state*). Here's the kicker, my brother pays $1850 a month in child support, $950 in alimony - and because he is not the biological father he does NOT get any visitation rights to his oldest child. The fact that his ex even keeps her from visiting along with her other siblings, is beyond comprehension. How do you let 4 little kids go visit dad's family for Christmas, and let that poor girl stay at home - to me is criminal...but she will pay in the long run for those decisions.

Luluc-that is terrible that she would not allow the child to visit the man she knows as dad. She will pay for that in the long run-I firmly believe in karma and eventually it will come back around to her. As for my sister and her ex. The guy turned out to be a pedophile, molesting my daughter as well as 3 other children that we know of. He spent his time in jail(and my sister received NOTHING during this time) and was released. Well he met some new woman, got her pregnant and ended up murdering her. He is currently incarcerated and awaiting trial. My sister cut all ties to him after they briefly reconciled(when their child was 5) and she became pregnant again and he insisted she have an abortion. So their oldest child recently turned 15 and their youngest will be 10 in May. She wants nothing to do with him and would rather struggle to make ends meet than have anything to do with him. She makes $12 per hour and per state guidelines here(Alabama) she makes "too much" to qualify for food stamps or any other kind of government help. My husband and I help out as much as we can but we have 4 children of our own.

Heather, that is truly tragic. My heart goes out to your family!!