Man wants maintenance repaid following dna test

marienbad

Let it go, going to court is just a further waste of money- no judge will force that woman to repay him, and think of the child . Is that what he wants the child to remember him by , dragging his mother through the courts ?

I presume at this stage he has been denied any access or no longer wishes access to the child. If so move on , this woman has destroyed a good portion of his life, don't let her destroy any more.

Just let it go- it will poison your life.

The Corinthian

TBH, from what I have read, paternity fraud does occur but the rate appears to be very much dependent on the socioeconomic background of the 'parents'. The BBC, however, reported on this not too long ago and some of their findings were quite unnerving. How often it happens though, I think is far less important from the fact that it does happen; even if it is relatively rare, it should not devalue the heinousness of the crime.

Personally, I do believe that if there is even the remotest chance that paternity could be in question, then a woman should disclose this information. That is, if she's had any kind of sexual relations (or believes she may have had) with other men during the same period as the alleged father then at the very least he should be told. To withhold such information is a clear attempt to mislead.

Men should probably seek DNA tests more often than they do. I expect ignorance of their availability is part of the reason for this, but so is the fear of alienating the mother given the rather tenuous position men legally are in.

As to intentionally or semi-intentionally, where a woman is not 100% sure and presumes that one man is the father (typically because of personal or financial reasons) despite there being other possible candidates and without full disclosure, deceives a man is essentially a criminal offense. Or at least it should be given that it is at the least financial fraud (IMHO, nothing compared to the emotional fraud), but then again it appears legally a criminal offense it is not and we can still plead the belly in the twenty-first century.

iguana

Freefallen wrote: »

In anyway he's not going to back down and he's going to persue it through the courts. He suffered emotionally, mentally, physically and financially at the hands of a deceitful self centred bed hopper. Why should he just walk away??? Women like her need to realise that there is consequences for their unsavoury actions and she must pay the price even if it takes her an eternity to repay him.

Because I'm afraid the odds are that she won't be paying any price and he will end up in a far worse place after he has exhausted his options. He will have less money and will have spent years going through an extremely emotional and probably damaging court case. The judge is unlikely to award against her a sum that she must pay off for an indefinite period in order to pay him back. It just doesn't happen like that. I linked to a case in the UK where the father got one of the biggest sums ever awarded and even still it was between a quarter and a fifth of what he paid out. And this was a case taken by a wealthy man who could afford the best solicitors. If he walks away he gets to start healing now and tbh, that's probably the best he can hope for.

Look Freefallen, you seem very involved in all of this. It makes me suspect that you are the 'friend' in question. If you really are just a friend it should be easier for you to put your emotions aside for a few minutes and go back and read over the advice given. Nobody is saying he should just walk away from a likely victory. They are saying that he should walk away because he is not likely to have any success.

I'm sorry it should be different and if he does decide to take this case I really do hope it goes well for him. He was defrauded and he should get his money back. But the money is gone, it was most likely spent as it was given and chasing after it will most likely be throwing good money after bad. Moving on and living well is his best option.

Motorist

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Quick to judge? She slept with more than one man and allowed one act as father without informing him for 3 years that he may not be the father!!!! How can it not be intentional, she slept with more than one man!?!?!?!?!

Had he known there was a chance from the outset that he was not the father and he chose to go ahead for 3 years and not get the DNA test is one thing, were he oblivious then the cow should be held accountable legally!

Jesus do people really get this animated over hypothetical situations

The Corinthian

iguana wrote: »

I'm sorry it should be different and if he does decide to take this case I really do hope it goes well for him. He was defrauded and he should get his money back. But the money is gone, it was most likely spent as it was given and chasing after it will most likely be throwing good money after bad. Moving on and living well is his best option.

Perhaps, but I would also suggest that in absence of paternity fraud being recognized as a criminal offense, there is a moral duty to pursue such cases in the civil courts. Other than highlighting what is, for many, a little known crime, it may act as a deterrent in the future - after all, if a woman does want to commit paternity fraud, she has nothing to lose if she gets caught at present.

iguana

The Corinthian wrote: »

Perhaps, but I would also suggest that in absence of paternity fraud being recognized as a criminal offense, there is a moral duty to pursue such cases in the civil courts. Other than highlighting what is, for many, a little known crime, it may act as a deterrent in the future - after all, if a woman does want to commit paternity fraud, she has nothing to lose if she gets caught at present.

A moral duty to cost himself thousands and thousands of euros? I see where you are coming from but I really think it is in the man's own best interests to let it go. And it could also be argued that if people keep on seeing men lose these cases it gives the women who want to commit this type of fraud as much of a sense of security as if nobody took such cases, if not even more.

If he really wants to do what's best for society he could start an awareness raising campaign or start a campaign for routine paternity testing to be introduced. At least that won't end up costing him a fortune and he'll have less pressure on him than he would with a court case.

fenris

Fittle wrote: »

If he was raising that child as his own, he should just suck it up and try to stay in contact with the child, no matter that he's not the biological father. The child is the innocent party here. Your friend should have acted on his suspicions the second the child was born and should not have allowed this situation to continue for four years, when the only person who will really suffer here, is the child.

The child is not his.

He was being milked and emotionally abused for the last few years.

This is not about the child it is about the mother's deliberate and cynical fraudulent activity. Her responsibility from beginning to end along with whatever consequences accrue from her behavior.

The person who has suffered and will continue to suffer for some time to come is the man who was defrauded.

I think that he should get everything repaid along with compensation for the time and opportunities that were stolen from him.

Do I think it likely that any male would get a fair hearing in an Irish family court, even in a case as clear cut as this one - not a hope, some loon of a judge could do anything in there.

Fittle

Time for me to step-away from this thread...

Freefallen

Fittle wrote: »

How on earth are the rest of society going to pay for the error of her ways

OP, stories like yours are one of my pet hates. All we get to hear is his side of the story. There is also her side of the story. And somewhere in the middle, is the truth of what actually happened.

...and your post above makes some massive generalisations 'It would make women think twice before they lie and trick men...' and so on.

If he was raising that child as his own, he should just suck it up and try to stay in contact with the child, no matter that he's not the biological father. The child is the innocent party here. Your friend should have acted on his suspicions the second the child was born and should not have allowed this situation to continue for four years, when the only person who will really suffer here, is the child.

They'll pay with her claiming lone parent for starters and any thing else she can claim for. I understand your pet hate taste but thats the way this thread is. Yes an obvious generalisation that sentence and the following are but the rest is based on the occurence that she never disclosed to him there was a possibility the child was not his untill they went to court and the judge questioned her.

He had no suspicions untill he chatted with his brothers partner about pregnancy. Why should he just suck it up??? He was deceived by that woman. The child was conceived by the mother and another man. Should he "act the daddy" for someone else's child, she'll have to get her claws into some other role mate and she what he'll do for her.

The Corinthian

iguana wrote: »

A moral duty to cost himself thousands and thousands of euros? I see where you are coming from but I really think it is in the man's own best interests to let it go.

On a personal level I completely agree, I simply suggested that there is a moral or social argument for him doing so.

And it could also be argued that if people keep on seeing men lose these cases it gives the women who want to commit this type of fraud as much of a sense of security as if nobody took such cases, if not even more.

That's a fair point and all the more chilling if true as it literally does mean that there exists a form of fraud that is completely immune from prosecution.

If he really wants to do what's best for society he could start an awareness raising campaign or start a campaign for routine paternity testing to be introduced. At least that won't end up costing him a fortune and he'll have less pressure on him than he would with a court case.

Also a fair point. The only thing that I would note is that even in this thread some have seemingly sought to lessen the crime or even justify it on the basis of the interests of the child, so any such awareness campaign would have to combat this type of attitude. It really does turn my stomach to see children used as a justification for such disgusting crimes.

LegacyUser

fenris wrote: »

The child is not his.

Prob a discussion for another thread but begs the question what makes someone a parent? The child is no biologically his but he has spent the last 4 years being the child's father and the child views him as her father We can argue legality and science/biology etc etc but man who is not a child's biological or adoptive father may still have custody rights in certain circumstances given he has raised the child from infancy to an age where they aware of their relationships to certain people.

Freefallen

He has just arranged legal advice and very determined not to let this go.

iguana

In that case the best of luck to him.

The Corinthian

Freefallen wrote: »

He has just arranged legal advice and very determined not to let this go.

I also wish him luck (although I suspect I'm the only one who means it).

He's going to have a very difficult time as both the legal and social biases that exist in the courts will play against him and the woman in question will undoubtedly seek to use her child as a means to avoid punishment for her actions.

Also, as iguana pointed out, it could backfire and cause him more harm than good. However, if he does succeed to some degree and is able to publicize this success, his actions may act as a deterrent to any would-be fraudster of this type in the future and spare many men and the children that are so deceived an immense amount of harm.

iguana

The Corinthian wrote: »

I also wish him luck (although I suspect I'm the only one who means it).

No, I do wish him luck. I do think he should be entitled to the money he has paid back, I just don't think he will get it and fear that following this route will do him more harm than good.

The Corinthian

iguana wrote: »

No, I do wish him luck. I do think he should be entitled to the money he has paid back, I just don't think he will get it and fear that following this route will do him more harm than good.

Sorry and fair enough; it's simply how you seemed to come across to me.

As long as he understands the risks and is willing to pay the price, however, it is both his choice to make and one that I suspect many would not have the courage to make.

January

Freefallen wrote: »

He has just arranged legal advice and very determined not to let this go.

And on this note, we close the thread. Good luck OP's friend.