Not exactly as good as I hoped, but this is surprisingly… Much better than I thought? I expected there to be no legal recourse whatsoever.

dmbrokaw · 2022-11-30T16:27:42+00:00

prove that the defendant mother deliberately, or recklessly, made a statement (which she knew to be false)

She could just argue that she was still sleeping with you so there was a chance the child was yours. Then she didn't 'know' the statement was false, she just had reason to believe it might not be.

I have a hard time seeing many men using this legal avenue successfully.

63daddy · 2022-11-30T17:10:27+00:00

Good to see some improvement, but I disagree with the fundamental argument that defrauded fathers shouldn’t be compensated for their fraud because a child was a beneficiary of the fraud. Paternity fraud is fraud and should be treated as such. All fraud cheats the rightful person out if their hard earned money to benefit others. Paternity fraud is not unique in this regard.

If I committed insurance fraud, using some of the money to pay for my kid’s education, I wouldn’t get off the hook because my fraud benefited kids.

The “but it benefits kids” argument doesn’t fly in any other kind of fraud and shouldn’t fly in paternity fraud. Someone who commits paternity fraud is just as guilty as someone committing any other kind of fraud and should be held equally accountable. Similarly the victim is just as victimized as with any other type of fraud and just as deserving to get back the money they were defrauded.

The reality is we excuse paternity fraud in ways we don’t excuse other types of fraud because it’s a crime committed exclusively by women against men.

Bottom line: Paternity fraud should be treated as the fraud it is.

Fearless-File-3625 · 2022-11-30T17:17:16+00:00

BioClinics (a DNA testing facility) recorded that nearly half of its 5,000 participants were not their child’s biological father.

Always get a DNA test, lying hoes are everywhere.

the complainant is not then entitled to a refund of the maintenance payments he has made. The reason for this is simple: it is to protect children. They are the real innocent party after all.

Bad excuse. Women can literally get away with murdering their infant children in England but they can't refund literal fraud money.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide_Act

the court established that a claimant father will be entitled to damages (as a means of recovering any payments made) provided that those payments were not made for the sole benefit of the child.

So apparently, child support is not just for the child.

Title	Not exactly as good as I hoped, but this is surprisingly… Much better than I thought? I expected there to be no legal recourse whatsoever.
Author	KazukiYahashi
Upvotes	24
Comments	3
Date	November 30, 2022 3:17 PM UTC (3 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/z8u36x/not_exactly_as_good_as_i_hoped_but_this_is/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/not-exactly-as-good-as-i-hoped-but-this-is.1141266 https://theredarchive.com/post/1141266

Comments