Should paternity fraud be illegal?

exit_sandman · 2016-05-03T09:07:18+00:00

Should the woman be punished in some way?

Yes.

What I said a few weeks ago when we had another topic regarding paternity fault, someone said she should be obligated to reimburse her partner for his expenses. My take on this was - and still is - that she should actually pay more (or be penalized in a different manner) for it for the simple reason that she should be worse off than a woman who would have admitted to cheating right after the birth of the kid, therefore enabling her partner to make an informed decision about raising another guy's baby and continuing to paying for her as well.

Paternity fraud should not be an economically feasible decision, and currently, it is.

Should proof of intent be required?

If you can prove intent (which I strongly doubt is that easy if possible at all), the penalty should be even more severe.

What, if any, considerations would you have for the child?

What about the kids being born to drug addicts? To (female) hobos? In the third world?

The favorite line of reasoning of the "pro fraud-advocates" is that the kid shouldn't be punished for the actions of the mother. Well, the kid isn't punished - there just isn't a birthright to be taken care of by a guy you're not related to. The kids I've mentioned before also aren't punished - they're just unfortunate. Should be allot human workhorses to them as well so they have a better life?

Saying that the kid gets punished (because the partner kicks out the mother after finding out, because the mother has to pay a penalty for fraud she can't afford etc.), is like saying that the kid of a drug-addicted mother who OD's shortly after birth is punished. And demanding that the mother should be shielded from any negative consequences that came from her decision to try to commit paternity fraud because these would also hurt the kid is highly questionable as well. What if the mother was a criminal? What if she had committed a bank robbery? Would you also say that she shouldn't go to jail because doing so would also mean "punishing the kid for the actions of the mother"? Because this certainly is the case.

Paternity fraud is fraud. It's a really long con that leeches off ressources of a man, potentially for decades, who never agreed to it but took his partner's word in good faith. We should also treat it accordingly.

DaphneDK · 2016-05-03T07:08:49+00:00

Yes, it should be illegal. But very hard to prove that it's intentional fraud.

At a minimum all child support etc. should be paid back with interest, regardless if the fraud was deliberate or not.

Entropy-7 · 2016-05-03T10:06:03+00:00

The bigger question is whether the state should be enabling it by banning paternity tests rather than making them mandatory.

yo_radical_one · 2016-05-03T13:01:46+00:00

Of course.

You should be able to sue her of an amount she took compounded for interest and inflation. If you can prove malicious intent, she should have to pay additional damages and get a criminal record.

I don't understand why this is even a discussion and perhaps if we did give men protection and showed them an ounce of empathy, all this hardcore sexist manosphere crap wouldn't have been created in reaction to society.

disposable_pants · 2016-05-03T14:33:35+00:00

If we're talking about the "best interest of the child" here, it's obviously in the best interest of the child to know their actual family history from Day 1. Strictly from a medical perspective, knowing who your actual father is (and knowing what his family medical history is) should be mandatory.

5th_Law_of_Robotics · 2016-05-03T12:24:55+00:00

Absolutely. It's unfair to the child and father.

kick6 · 2016-05-03T14:40:14+00:00

Yes. Paternity fraud is the male equivalent to rape.

Darth_Sin · 2016-05-03T13:56:05+00:00

Yes, paternity fraud should be illegal and punishable. I don't know why this is up for debate, unless if you don't care about the men.

Adderallabuse · 2016-05-03T13:04:28+00:00

Does anyone know of a Civil case that any man ever won?

InformalCriticism · 2016-05-03T13:13:31+00:00

~~Possibly~~ having him pay child support if they divorce

If you're twisted enough to fly a human life under someone's radar, you already don't care about that person enough to financially leech off them. So, yes, you're causing suffering in multiple lies for selfish reasons; what's the real argument against criminalizing I wonder.

questioningwoman · 2016-05-03T14:16:09+00:00

Paternity fraud would die out if paternity tests were required before child support was given.

GaiusScaevolus · 2016-05-03T16:11:37+00:00

In addition to reimbursing expenses incurred during the pregnancy, I think a reimbursement for 'emotional distress' would make sense.

darksoldierk · 2016-05-03T17:12:22+00:00

Every other kind of fraud is, why not paternity fraud?

Feeldariddim · 2016-05-03T18:42:53+00:00

Kind of mind blowing that this is even a question. Of course it should be illegal, the real question is what would be the standard of proof.

despisedlove2 · 2016-05-03T12:29:44+00:00

I don't speak for all men, but I think that restitution of all the money (with interest) that a defrauded husband may have spent on the bastard child, along with 100% custody of all legitimate children to the husband in a zero alimony, zero argument, 100% shared property to husband divorce, would fit the case.

Beyond that, if the society wishes to make an example of the cheating c*t, that is up to the society.

sublimemongrel · 2016-05-03T15:54:32+00:00

Personally, I like the case of Hodge v. Craig. It's a 2012 Tennessee Supreme Court decision that recognizes that

We have determined that the existing common-law action for intentional misrepresentation encompasses the claims made in this case by the former husband and that the trial court’s damage award based on the former husband’s post-divorce payments for child support, medical expenses, and insurance premiums is not an improper retroactive modification of the former husband’s child support obligation.

Basically, the Court recognized paternity fraud as a common law claim for intentional misrepresentation (a tort claim recognized everywhere).

Here's a summary of what happened in the trial court proceedings:

After concluding that Ms. Hodge’s conduct amounted to “fraud, intentional misrepresentation, [and] negligent misrepresentation,” the trial court awarded Mr. Craig $23,030.24, “representing the total child support paid by Chadwick Bradley Craig,” $2,214.20, “representing medical expenses and insurance premiums paid by Chadwick Bradley Craig,” and $1,181.75 “for TRH Health Plans.” The court also awarded Mr. Craig $100,000.00 “for the emotional distress suffered” and $8,451.71 in attorney’s fees.

The Tennessee Court of Appeals originally struck the award due to concluding it was a retroactive modification of child support, which is expressly barred by statute. Note they did not strike down the trial court's finding that there was intentional misrep.

Here's a great summary of the two opposing views, ultimately the Court took the latter:

We candidly recognize that this case implicatesthe interests of the family, the putative biological father, the mother, the child, the actual biological father, and the State. Cases based on a mother’s misrepresentations regarding the identity of a child’s biological father present difficult and intractible problems that are “much more complicated than a bad girl, good guy scenario.” Those who oppose recognizing these claims insist that the courts’ primary concerns should focus on the child and the family and that the putative father’s interests should be secondary to those of “the state, the family, and the child in maintaining the continuity, financial support, and psychological security of an established parent-child relationship.” [citations omitted]. Those who support these claims assert that there is “a fundamental sense that it is unfair to require a man to support a child with whom he has no biological connection.” They also insist that there is a growing recognition that the courts should not force a man to support a child who is not his biological child unless he has been given an opportunity to make a voluntary choice to provide support despite his knowledge that he has no biological relationship with the child.

Basically, I think paternity fraud should be treated as any other type of civil fraud is. I do not think criminal penalties are appropriate because I think it would be detrimental to the child in most cases. However, awarding damages to a defrauded ex-spouse in the case of intentional or negligent misrepresentation shouldn't really be any different if it's paternity fraud vs other types of fraud, IMO. Perhaps the level of damages, but not the law itself.

Interestingly, in Hodge, the emotional distress claim wasn't preserved for appeal. So it would be interesting to find out how courts deal with those. At this time, I'm all in favor of compensatory damages for those defrauded by paternity fraud.

caesarfecit · 2016-05-03T18:04:44+00:00

Fraud is fraud. If the woman bilked the man for child support for a kid that wasn't his, and intent to deceive can be demonstrated, then that's fraud.

The difference between civil and criminal fraud is how clear the intent to deceive is. Whether its reckless disregard for the truth (she was sleeping around when she got knocked up and doesn't really know who the real dad is), or knowing deceit (she knows he's not the dad and hits him up for child support anyway).

The real problem with paternity fraud is the harm done to the child, and the fact that the state itself is made an unwitting accomplice to the fraud.

SOwED · 2016-05-03T13:51:59+00:00

Let's consider the case where she says her husband is the father, and he's not, but he is ordered to pay child support after an unrelated divorce. Paternity test shows that he is not the father, making it clear that the wife got pregnant by an affair.

She was using the legal system to take his money on false pretenses. If there's sufficient evidence to show that this was done deliberately (she knew it wasn't the husbands child) then I see no difference in that form of fraud and any other form. You're using a legal process to gain money based fundamentally on information you know to be false.

If she didn't know, I think the father is still owed reparations in some form, both for financial loss and emotional damage.

The hard part is finding evidence that she was doing this maliciously. Just because she was cheating doesn't necessarily mean she meant to get pregnant by the other man.

redmachines · 2016-05-03T10:39:03+00:00

Why not just mandate DNA testing every time a mother declares someone as the father?

utigers · 2016-05-03T15:58:13+00:00

I believe paternity fraud should be illegal. I think it should be civil punishment, simply because you'd have a hard time convincing any government to stick a child's only remaining parent in jail. Morally, she might deserve it, but I don't see any practical way of accomplishing that and it does further screw the other victim in the situation.

I think if you set a precedent where the man could sue for money that he spent on a child that wasn't his, it would be enough to deter women from doing that in the future, and thus, everyone is happy.

ChiisaiKuma · 2016-05-03T13:18:31+00:00

On the flip side, what about a man who has a 'secret love child' he sends money to without his wife's knowledge? Isn't he defrauding his wife and her children out of his exclusive economic investment and emotional involvement?

In both cases, I think punishment gets to be impractical. You can't get someone to pay you back money they just don't have (civil penalty) and it could get very costly to society to lock all these parents up (criminal penalty).

HigHog · 2016-05-03T08:57:24+00:00

While I of course agree it's an awful thing, I don't know whether much would come of making it illegal. How could you prove intent? The woman could easily claim she'd used a condom or taken birth control or whatever when she'd cheated so she didn't know that's when she'd conceived. It would only be obvious if she'd not also had sex with her partner around the time of conception, in which case he really ought to have twigged a bit sooner...

It should be up to the guy if he wants to pay child support or not. If he wants to continue acting as the father, then he should keep the responsibility of acting as the father. If he wants nothing more to do with the child he raised then yeah, he can stop child support.

rulenumber303 · 2016-05-03T09:57:12+00:00

At the very least it should carry the same weight as making a false statutory declaration, even when no actual losses result from it. I do tend to think the welfare of the child should be a factor in timing of the recovery of past costs, but not in the cancelation of future payments.

But I think somewhere along the line some sort of consideration needs also to be given to making men not sign that form when there are reasons to be doubtful. When both parties knew she was having sex with more than one man, just accepting her word on it seems more like folie a deux than a case of fraud. Definitely we should restrict prison sentences only to cases where something more than being carried away by wishful thinking is in play.

betterdeadthanbeta · 2016-05-03T09:01:22+00:00

Illegal, hell. Should be punishable by death.

Adultery too. For both sexes. And refusal to have sex for like, 5 days should result in 100 lashes.

Boom. Marriage fixed.

speltspelt · 2016-05-03T13:44:48+00:00

This comes down to banning and putting criminal sanctions on female infidelity while giving male infidelity a completely free pass. Plenty of guys engage in conduct that could result in an extra-pair child without immediately disclosing it to their partner. If guys rigorously disclosed every extra-pair pairing they might have a case.

Even on Maury, often it comes out "you ARE the father". If a woman is 95% sure the kid is her partner's and the kid is her partner's, disclosing the 5% uncertainty is really likely to screw up the kid's life for no good reason. Women don't have this magical sense for whose baby it is either.

Guys can also just test on their own if they're uncertain, nobody is stopping them.

In practice, universal paternity knowledge is coming because DNA testing is just that cheap and getting cheaper. Artificial gestation/mass embryo selection/genetic modification is probably also coming on the elite end which'll make sex essentially irrelevant for child creation.

Leinadro · 2016-05-04T16:43:06+00:00

I wager if paternity fraud was recognized and women were punished for it rape claims would sky rocket and then the "believe the victim" condition was activate where anyone that questions her story would be called a rape apologist and shamed into accepting her story as gospel.

daveofmars · 2016-05-06T01:11:18+00:00

Shouldn't all fraud be illegal?

To answer your question directly: yes, it should be illegal and she should be punished (sued) in civil court. The man paid X dollars for raising the child on the assumption that the child was his. The payment was contingent on that understanding. If it was fraud, then that frees him from paying anything more and opens the door for him suing for damages.

And if this seems harsh, just remember that paternity fraud isn't an accident. Women don't wake up one day pregnant by another man. Like credit card fraud, you have to want to do it. If you're an honest person then you have nothing to worry about.

[deleted] · 2016-05-03T09:57:16+00:00

Even stuff like pure orange juice is bad for you, just drink water :(

Justbeingme145 · 2016-05-03T10:16:18+00:00

Make it illegal (as long as it is intentional) is a good idea, but how do you go about it in practise?

Make her pay back child support over X number of years? I don't think the average single mom that gets child support can afford that, not in a million years. Sent her to prison? Who's gonna take care of the child? The state?

Making it illegal and making the woman pay it all back is good from the perspective of justice. But is it feasible? What's the impact on society? These are important questions.

lbspredh · 2016-05-03T10:46:55+00:00

Too much scope for innocent mistakes to make it criminal, if financial support was given for the kid maybe a civil action against the true parents for the money should be a thing . Then again for court costs and the outlay of enforcing the new laws it might be easier to mandate a paternity test upon birth

AutoModerator · 2016-05-03T06:58:24+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "CMV" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair, just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

leftajar · 2016-05-03T18:56:45+00:00

No. I don't think being an asshole should be illegal.

That being said, it SHOULD be legal to NOT PAY CHILD SUPPORT ON A CHILD THAT ISN'T YOURS. And it should be legal NOT TO HAVE TO PAY TAXES TO SUPPORT RETARDED SINGLE MOTHERS.

wombatinaburrow · 2016-05-04T09:25:30+00:00

Where I live, a man in this situation can sue for reimbursement, as well as pain and suffering. The child can also sue his mother for pain and suffering. I know one man who did, was awarded the child support money reimbursed, and now has primary custody of the kid due to her being deemed as incapable of caring for the child whilst making the repayments.

Title	Should paternity fraud be illegal?
Author	TheChemist158
Upvotes	21
Comments	234
Date	May 3, 2016 6:58 AM UTC (10 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/4hm3yh/should_paternity_fraud_be_illegal/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/should-paternity-fraud-be-illegal.274829 https://theredarchive.com/post/274829

Comments