Jailed, he was a "deadbeat".. Problem? The child wasn't his...

[Damocles]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090716/ap_on_re_us/us_wrongfully_jailed

ADEL, Ga. – A Georgia man spent more than a year behind bars for failing to pay child support for a child that wasn't his, but he was released after DNA tests showed he wasn't the father.

Frank Hatley, 50, had been jailed since June 2008 for not making payments, but two separate DNA tests in the last nine years showed he was not the father of the boy, who is now 21.

Southern Center for Human Rights attorney Sarah Geraghty won Hatley's release at a hearing Wednesday in Superior Court. A court order has also relieved him of his financial obligation to the Georgia Department of Human Resources.

"State child support officials have shown extraordinarily poor judgment in Mr. Hatley's case," Geraghty said.

Although Hatley was freed from making future payments after a 2001 hearing, Superior Court Judge Dan Perkins had ordered him to continue making $16,000 in back payments. He paid $6,000 of that before being laid off from his job.

More at link...

 

[uscitizen]

so the child waas not his but he still has to make the arrears payments?

Is there no justice?

 

[Damocles]

so the child waas not his but he still has to make the arrears payments?

Is there no justice?

Not for men in family court.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

so the child waas not his but he still has to make the arrears payments?

Is there no justice?

The State does not care. They do not want responsibility for paying to support that child or mother. A friend of mines wife was flagrantly cheating on him. She ended up getting knocked up by the other man. He filed for divorce. He ended up getting stuck with both alimony and child support even though blood tests and DNA proved conclusively that the child was not his and the father of the child was identified. He was still ordered by the courts to pay both alimony and child support. The judges rational, someone had to pay for the child and mother besides the state and he generated more income then the biological father. When he complained to the judge "What are my rights here?" she said, "The only right you have is to provide for the mother and child.".


About every two years she takes him back to court to have both alimony and child support increased. The court has sided with her every time. One year when they raised his alimony he was out of work due to an injury. Judge told him to get off his ass and get a job or she'd throw him in jail for contempt. As a result of this, he blew a disc at work and was subsequently served papers for contempt while he was in the hospital recovering from surgery.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

Not for men in family court.

The only right a father has in family court is to pay, and pay and pay. The mother can be grossly incompetent, endnager the life of the child, be in contempt of and completely disregard the fathers court ordered paternal rights, she can even be a criminal and the courts will look the other way....but god help him if he misses a payment. Then he's a deadbeat. There is no accountability for mothers in family court.

 

[Demwit]

If a father does something wrong it is always "that asshole"
if a mother does something wrong it is "Ohh that poor thing"

 

[Thorn]

I thought that some of this was finally changing to more realistic conditions. From Mottley's example, though, which seems to be recent, I must have been dreaming. This is outrageous.

I understand that initially some of this harshness was intended to forestall the behavior of some of what GHWB called "deadbeat dads" who blithely ignored court orders to contribute financially to their children's upbringing. Clearly, though, the pendulum has swung 'way too far. It's time for some sanity and fairness.

 

[Canceled1]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090716/ap_on_re_us/us_wrongfully_jailed

ADEL, Ga. – A Georgia man spent more than a year behind bars for failing to pay child support for a child that wasn't his, but he was released after DNA tests showed he wasn't the father.

Frank Hatley, 50, had been jailed since June 2008 for not making payments, but two separate DNA tests in the last nine years showed he was not the father of the boy, who is now 21.

Southern Center for Human Rights attorney Sarah Geraghty won Hatley's release at a hearing Wednesday in Superior Court. A court order has also relieved him of his financial obligation to the Georgia Department of Human Resources.

"State child support officials have shown extraordinarily poor judgment in Mr. Hatley's case," Geraghty said.

Although Hatley was freed from making future payments after a 2001 hearing, Superior Court Judge Dan Perkins had ordered him to continue making $16,000 in back payments. He paid $6,000 of that before being laid off from his job.

More at link...

I cannot believe that in this day and age this kind of crap still exists, but I know it does. The imbalance between men's rights versus women's in this kind of situation is so out of whack it defies logic.

I am incredulous every time I hear a story where a man gets completely hosed by some ne'er do well woman who can't keep her pants on.

This is the stuff that made Jerry Springer loads of dough. It's disgusting.

Not only should this man get every penny he spent back with interest compounded by the minute, he should sue the living daylights out of the woman, the county, the attorney and anyone else who had a hand in this farce from here to kingdom come!

 

[Whomever]

I thought that some of this was finally changing to more realistic conditions. From Mottley's example, though, which seems to be recent, I must have been dreaming. This is outrageous.

I understand that initially some of this harshness was intended to forestall the behavior of some of what GHWB called "deadbeat dads" who blithely ignored court orders to contribute financially to their children's upbringing. Clearly, though, the pendulum has swung 'way too far. It's time for some sanity and fairness.

How about a routine genetic test at birth for all children for accurate birth certificates?

 

[Thorn]

How about a routine genetic test at birth for all children for accurate birth certificates?

I guess it would depend upon the reasonable need. These procedures are very expensive; it would be hard to justify doing this in every case. Anyway, this poor guy was forced to pay even early on when he already had the DNA test results that showed the child wasn't his. The judge's rationale was that well somebody had to pay ... She should have been thrown off the bench and she should have paid, not him.

I wonder what it would do to the rendering of judgments if certain judges were held more accountable for such crappy verdicts.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I cannot believe that in this day and age this kind of crap still exists, but I know it does. The imbalance between men's rights versus women's in this kind of situation is so out of whack it defies logic.

I am incredulous every time I hear a story where a man gets completely hosed by some ne'er do well woman who can't keep her pants on.

This is the stuff that made Jerry Springer loads of dough. It's disgusting.

Not only should this man get every penny he spent back with interest compounded by the minute, he should sue the living daylights out of the woman, the county, the attorney and anyone else who had a hand in this farce from here to kingdom come!

Sadly, it's not about rights. It's about who has the financial burden of support and the courts are not to paraticular about whom they assign that to as long as the state is not stuck with that burden.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

How about a routine genetic test at birth for all children for accurate birth certificates?

Again, not relevent. The courts don't care. What they care about is that the State is not stuck with the tab. That means they will assign that cost to whomever they feel is most capable of paying that cost and not to the person who is responsible. This and the childs health and well being are their two biggest concerns.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I guess it would depend upon the reasonable need. These procedures are very expensive; it would be hard to justify doing this in every case. Anyway, this poor guy was forced to pay even early on when he already had the DNA test results that showed the child wasn't his. The judge's rationale was that well somebody had to pay ... She should have been thrown off the bench and she should have paid, not him.

I wonder what it would do to the rendering of judgments if certain judges were held more accountable for such crappy verdicts.

Punishing judges for making 'crappy' verdicts? Have you ever heard of appeal? We don't want to squash all legal thought. It's not the judges fault at all, it's the legislatures.

 

[uscitizen]

Again, not relevent. The courts don't care. What they care about is that the State is not stuck with the tab. That means they will assign that cost to whomever they feel is most capable of paying that cost and not to the person who is responsible. This and the childs health and well being are their two biggest concerns.

Is relevant, If the husband is not the father he would know immediately and would not be listed as the father on the birth ceritifcate. And could divorce the floozy based on genetic evidence of infidelity.
Laws could be made for the mother to declare the true father to collect child support from him, the real deadbeat.

It would do away with the old "Mommas baby daddys maybe".