|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
Illinois Father Takes DNA Fraud Case To Supreme Court |
Current rating: 0 |
by MND Newswire
(No verified email address) |
31 May 2002
Modified: 04 Jun 2002 |
|
Carnell A. Smith is a father who is forced by court order to pay child support for another man's child. This child is neither his biological nor adopted child. Smith has tried to get the lower courts to overturn the child support order, but they have refused. |
This is an extract. For the full story, click on the link below.
Carnell Smith is now asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear his DNA "paternity fraud" case. Nationally renowned fathers' rights attorney and advocate, Jeffery M. Leving of Chicago, has filed an appearance with the high court to represent Smith.
Although this court ruling sounds unusual, it isn't. There are countless men who find themselves in Smith's situation.
Partially as a result of the availability of DNA paternity testing, men are discovering in alarming numbers that children they believed were their biological offspring are not. It was reported that in 28 percent of paternity tests conducted in 1999, the man being tested was not the biological father. Nevertheless, many of these men continue to be liable for child support for other men's children or suffer the consequences of jail.
This can happen to married men because many states adhere to a 500-year-old English common-law doctrine that presumes a married man is the father of a child born of the marriage. Never-married men can find themselves in this precarious position through default paternity and child support judgments. Such a judgment can be court ordered without the alleged father's knowledge. For example, the alleged dad does not show up at court to contest the paternity action because he did not know about the court date. This can result when the alleged father is not personally served notice of the court date by a process server or law enforcement officer.
"The issue is crystal clear. Paternity fraud is just as reprehensible as any other kind of fraud from which Americans need protection. When we condone fraud in paternity DNA cases, we undermine our entire system of justice. It's time to correct this injustice," said Leving. |
See also:
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/stories/newswire053102a.htm
|
|
What You Missed in Junior High |
by UR Dick
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
01 Jun 2002
|
Some advice,
#1 Keep your pants on.
#2 If #1 fails, ALWAYS use a condom.
And remember, when the dick gets hard, the brain goes soft. Why go whining to some guy in a black robe about your indiscretions?
U R obviously a schmuck,
UR Dick
PS Why is it liberatarians never want the state around, except when they want to claim that THEIR rights have been violated? Quaint, but hypocritical. |
|
Bizarre |
by sarah
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
01 Jun 2002
|
The website promotes a radio show for the lawyer, Leving. It also has a column by Pat Buchanan and one about how I am frigid because I don't have a husband to submit to and a family to put before my own personal needs.
You know, women are a completely different species with a whole set of "servant" fantasies that we suppress.
I wonder how the whole "frigid" idea and the "slut" idea in the above article jive. |
|
To the respondees |
by ...
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
04 Jun 2002
|
by UR Dick 12:37am Sat Jun 1 '02
comment#5758
Some advice,
#1 Keep your pants on.
#2 If #1 fails, ALWAYS use a condom.
And remember, when the dick gets hard, the brain goes soft. Why go whining to some guy in
a black robe about your indiscretions?
U R obviously a schmuck,
UR Dick
PS Why is it liberatarians never want the state around, except when they want to claim that
THEIR rights have been violated? Quaint, but hypocritical.
UR Dick has missed the point of the article. These kids have nothing to do with these guys' "pants".
Bizarre
by sarah 1:36am Sat Jun 1 '02
comment#5759
The website promotes a radio show for the lawyer, Leving. It also has a column by Pat
Buchanan and one about how I am frigid because I don't have a husband to submit to and a
family to put before my own personal needs.
I'm a bit surprised to see such problems aired so publicly. =)
You know, women are a completely different species with a whole set of "servant" fantasies
that we suppress.
Wouldn't this tend to negate a bunch of worthwhile stuff like equal pay for equal work? I've always held that men and women were functionally equivalent, with only minor differences in mental makeup mostly based on socialization.
I wonder how the whole "frigid" idea and the "slut" idea in the above article jive.
This person read a different article. I didn't see a "slut" idea anywhere. This is a very real problem and it's occurring in our back yards. It's hard to imagine a real friend of the oppressed who wouldn't care.
If these women slept around to produce these kids, they need to pay for them until such time as the real father is located. What's right is right. |
