Do you support Florida's new "paternity fraud" law? Why or why not?

Question

This law allows an alleged father to challenge the paternity of a child with genetic evidence. If he wins (proves that the child is not his), he is no longer required to pay child support.

Men's rights advocates claim the law gives justice to men decieved into paying child support for someone else's child. Child advocates claim the law is not in the best interests of mothers or children, and will increase the state's welfare burden.

What is your opinion?

This article from the Miami Herald gives more details:
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/breaking_news/15882285.htm

As far as I know, the law does not apply to adoptive fathers. It is only for men who accept responsibility for a child under the mistaken assumption that they are the biological father of the child.

Answer 1

I say good for Florida. Women shouldn't be allowed to just pick a guy and make him pay child support. If she doesn't know who the father is another man should not be punished for the fact that she sleeps around.

Also why should a man be responsible for another man's child?

Child advocates really need to step into reality. The law is not in the best interest of mothers or children, that is just ridiculous. Men and women who are the non custodial parents really get stiffed in these rights. It is about time that the child support system catches up.

Women like these disgust me. They dupe decent men into paying for children that are not there's because they are trying to do a good thing. They are the reason why man men don't want to claim a child when a women comes up and says this is you child.

I support it whole heartedly. I don't think a man who is not the biological father should have to be responsible financially for a child that is not there own.

Answer 2

I agree that men should not have to pay child support for any child that is not their own. But there should be an exception for adoptive fathers. It will make things more difficult for single mothers, which is sad, but at the same time should not be the responsibility of some poor guy who came along after the child was born. If a woman has six children by different men, then marries and divorces one just for the money, how fair is it for him to pay for all those children? I feel for the single mothers, but this is the only fair thing to do.

Answer 3

It's one thing to say that a husband is the "father" of his wife's baby, but with live-in arrangements it's quite another.

Most states have laws that make every child born to a marriage "legitimate" and the father's responsibility. There's some logic to this, as the man took a voluntary affirmative step accepting responsibility for future children.

However, with more casual arrangements, regardless of duration, there's no such affirmative step. This law needed to be passed for fairness' sake, even if it only deals with casual relationships.

If it encompasses cheating spouses, that would be fine by me, since the law establishing the husband's responsibility goes back centuries before anyone ever dreamed of the existence of DNA.

If the justification is that the child would become a burden to society, that's weak. There's no more reason to lay it on the non-biological father than to lay it on someone chosen at random from the phone book.

Answer 4

I think men should have their rights too. But why wasn't the testing done before the alleged father started paying support?? How old is the child? If it is just a toddler, then it could have been tested when it was born and there would have been no doubts. Child advocates are not thinking of the decieving that the alleged father has been thru.

Answer 5

I think it's a good idea. If I all of a sudden found out my child wasn't mine (I'm not going to ask for a paternity test when my wife gives birth) 12 years after the fact and then we get divorced, I shouldn't have to continue paying for that child. The biological dad should. If child advocates are going to argue with that, then they also need to take the child away from poor moms as well.

Answer 6

WELL of course that law makes sense....more sense than a lot of laws concerning child support...
of course a man should not have to pay support for a child that is not biologically his EXCEPT in a situation where he adopted and raised the child for some time them left the mother. if you adopt someone Else's child you are full aware that the child is not yours and take on the responsibility with all the needed information.
as for a welfare burden...that is really not an issue because it makes no sense for a man to pay support if he is not the childs father....one should have nothing to do with the other

Answer 7

As the wife of a man who out just last year that his third child age 12 was not his after paying over 65,000.00 in child support to support this child. I agree with the law. In our case the birth mother had the child tested when she found out the real father had a better paying job and would have to pay more in child support than my husband did.

This child now spends time with her birth father and is very happy with the situation.

But even with concrete proof Texas still required we had to go before a judge to have the child removed from a child support order.

Answer 8

I absolutely don't think one man should be forced to pay for another's child. I completely support such a law. It may not be in the best interests of mothers and children, but you can't make some guy pay to support some other guy's child. Perhaps the state should invest in sex education and free birth control.

Answer 9

I think paternity tests should be mandatory before any man pays anything. So I am in support of the law. I also think women who **** around with so many men they don't know who their baby's daddy is should be sterile. Thus decreasing the state's welfare burden.

Answer 10

I am a woman who receives child support, but ya know if I mess around and have a kid with my husband/boyfriend and let him believe that hes the dad.......thats wrong. He should NOT have to pay, the biological dad needs to be found and tested and let him pay. They can go on Maury and be tested for free.....I just thank God that I have never been in those shoes!!!!