# Dad by default?



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Is this true?






Dad by default: Judge makes surprising ruling in child support case | KFOR.com
Under Michigan laws men may not be the father, but still owe child support - WXYZ.com

Wow... never heard of such anywhere else in the world... wtf?! It's almost 2018, has the law changed?


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

My exH had a ONS that resulted in a child, was summoned to court, was ordered to take a DNA test, was proven father, and was ordered to pay child support. A few years later, he messed around with a different woman, was summoned to court for a DNA test for a baby girl, and he decided not to show up. He was pretty sure the baby girl was his, too, but he thought he could avoid court, avoid a court ordered DNA test, and avoid child support. He was sent a couple notices that he either had to show up for court and submit to DNA testing or he'd be named father by default. He now owes about $80,000 in unpaid support because he was named father by default. This was in the early '90's.

Is this boinked? Absolutely. When a man refuses to show up in court and submit to DNA testing, the court should order his appearance, issue a warrant for failure to comply with a court order if he doesn't appear, and then then DNA test him when/if he's eventually arrested. But naming fathers by default? No.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

RandomDude said:


> Is this true?
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6JS__PsI0w&t=4s
> 
> ...


This isn't something that is terribly common, but is also nothing new. Default paternity is assumed to be the husband in most places if the couple is married. It really gets fun in the cases where the man is proven by DNA to NOT be the father, but still ordered to pay child support. Routine paternity testing at birth regardless of marital status, with a father only listed on the birth certificate after positive paternity is established.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

And this loophole... has yet to be plugged?

How can a man even possibly live his life in a state where any woman can just put down his name while claiming welfare payments, getting forced to pay child support for a kid that isn't even his (one of the cases featured)


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

It can happen in Canada: A person who acts as a parent to the children of his or her spouse *may* have a legal obligation to support those step-children after the relationship with the spouse ends. ... When the children's natural parents pay the full amount of child support, the step-parent *may not *have to pay anything


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

MJJEAN said:


> My exH had a ONS that resulted in a child, was summoned to court, was ordered to take a DNA test, was proven father, and was ordered to pay child support. A few years later, he messed around with a different woman, ...


Condoms would have been cheaper! Avoiding responsibility isn't a good thing. Not showing up in court is basically the same as not contesting paternity, IMO. If he'd shown up, there was at least a chance that DNA tests would show otherwise.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

IMHO, in a world with legal abortion, I think that in the absence of a contract or marriage, the woman should have full rights and responsibilities for a child regardless of the physical parentage. 

I am happy with the state providing substantial support for unmarried mothers, and am willing to pay more taxes to support this. 

Biology just makes the situation asymmetric.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

uhtred said:


> IMHO, in a world with legal abortion, I think that in the absence of a contract or marriage, the woman should have full rights and responsibilities for a child regardless of the physical parentage.
> 
> I am happy with the state providing substantial support for unmarried mothers, and am willing to pay more taxes to support this.
> 
> Biology just makes the situation asymmetric.


What makes it asymmetric is the lack of investment research on decent birth control for men.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Good birth control for men would make things simpler, but the asymmetry I was talking about involved pregnancy. 

Since the child is part of the woman's body, I can't envision an acceptable framework where the man has any legal authority over the decision to carry or abort the fetus. (court ordered abortions, or court denial of abortions are both completely unacceptable to me). 






NobodySpecial said:


> What makes it asymmetric is the lack of investment research on decent birth control for men.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

This is why I will have my son's children tested to be sure I am related to them. Young people are too starry-eyed to take prudent steps such as paternity testing or pre-nup contracts. I can at least help out on the paternity issue, and nobody will know as long as the kids are my bio-grandchildren.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

uhtred said:


> Good birth control for men would make things simpler, but the asymmetry I was talking about involved pregnancy.
> 
> Since the child is part of the woman's body, I can't envision an acceptable framework where the man has any legal authority over the decision to carry or abort the fetus. (court ordered abortions, or court denial of abortions are both completely unacceptable to me).


One would think that if a man had decent control over conception, the latter consideration would become moot. Condoms are touted around these boards as a solution to much. But do you know ANY men who would willing use them all the time if something else were present?


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

Married but Happy said:


> Condoms would have been cheaper! Avoiding responsibility isn't a good thing. Not showing up in court is basically the same as not contesting paternity, IMO. If he'd shown up, there was at least a chance that DNA tests would show otherwise.


He claims to have used a condom and I do believe that, despite knowing he's a chronic liar. Why? Because I got pregnant by him while on birth control pills. After the birth control pill failed, I switched to condoms. I got pregnant by him again while using condoms with no known malfunctions. While I was pregnant with #2 (his #4), he had a vasectomy. We divorced a year later. He remarried. He and his wife have two kids. Apparently, his vasectomy healed on one side. This guy is just obscenely fertile.



NobodySpecial said:


> What makes it asymmetric is the lack of investment research on decent birth control for men.


Absolutely!



uhtred said:


> Good birth control for men would make things simpler, but the asymmetry I was talking about involved pregnancy.


It's really not so uncommon for a single method of birth control to fail. It's very uncommon for multiple methods of birth control to fail. If men had reliable internal device or hormonal birth control in their own right and then used a barrier method, such as a condom, accidental pregnancies would be very, very, rare. Non-existent if you add in a female partner also using internal device or hormonal birth control.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

Upsetting, but not surprising.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

MJJEAN said:


> He claims to have used a condom and I do believe that, despite knowing he's a chronic liar. Why? Because I got pregnant by him while on birth control pills. After the birth control pill failed, I switched to condoms. I got pregnant by him again while using condoms with no known malfunctions. While I was pregnant with #2 (his #4), he had a vasectomy. We divorced a year later. He remarried. He and his wife have two kids. Apparently, his vasectomy healed on one side. This guy is just obscenely fertile.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Though in the context of this thread where the issue is a man paying child support for a child that he is not the biological father of...not sure the issue of birth control access or failure really applies here.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

samyeagar said:


> Though in the context of this thread where the issue is a man paying child support for a child that he is not the biological father of...not sure the issue of birth control access or failure really applies here.


If men had reliable internal device or hormonal birth control there would be far fewer accidental pregnancies. . Fewer pregnancies means fewer fraud cases. Prevention. It's a start.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

Go your own way - It's an end.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

Mr. Nail said:


> Go your own way - It's an end.


MGTOW? The problem with MGTOW is that a lot of them like to meet women for sex, but won't get involved in a relationship for fear of being royally screwed over. The problem with that is, surprise, sometimes those sexual encounters result in an accidental pregnancy.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

I know, it's kind of like a guy who is afraid of lung cancer but can't give up smoking. 
Going your own way has to include a solid refusal to play the game. No legal relationship. No romantic relationship. No financial relationship. No sexual relationship.
Now me, it's too late, or rather Late enough. In my state I can't be held for child support. My rules are smaller. No big weddings (or high school practice weddings) No Diamonds. No new relationships.
Because if you pet a porcupine . . .


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Yes, perfect birth control for men would solve the problem. 

Condoms have multiple issues. They are not that reliable (I've had one break at an inopportune time). They also really do drastically diminish the sensation for men (don't know if they do for women).

Chemical birth control for men is more difficult than for women. For women, the normal cycle is adjusted so that women are never at a fertile stage. For men there is no equivalent natural cycle to modify. 





NobodySpecial said:


> One would think that if a man had decent control over conception, the latter consideration would become moot. Condoms are touted around these boards as a solution to much. But do you know ANY men who would willing use them all the time if something else were present?


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

:scratchhead: How is birth control a solution?

A woman can just sleep with someone else, have a kid, and name you as father by default forcing you to pay child support or go to jail.


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

I've heard cases of a man dating a single mother for a year or so and she has won child support payments after taking him to court because he assumed a "fatherly role" in her child's life while they dated.

Reason # 1037 not to date single mothers whose ex isn't in the picture or paying child support.

Men just have to be diligent that there is a relentless attack going on against them. Stop playing the stupid game they've setup for you to lose and lose big. Don't ever offer up your DNA to a woman unless you really, really want that child, never co-habitate or split finances, never be alone with a woman who can later accuse you of something, because in the court of public opinion all it takes is the accusation.

Wise up men, it's a cruel cruel world. In Europe they are removing the requirement that the child needs to be the biological offspring to be considered a man's child. So women can marry their beta paycheck, bang Chad and get impregnated by him, and poor beta paycheck is still on the hook for raising the little bastard.


----------



## marriageontherocks2 (Oct 4, 2017)

I also love how a man who can't support a child is a "deadbeat dad", "man up loser", take care of YOUR responsibility (even though he had no part in the decision to bring the child into the world, that is the woman's choice, that's been made abundantly clear), if he can't afford to pay because of a job loss he's thrown in jail. If a woman can't pay for her child she gets WIC, free medical, welfare, free college, free cell phone, subsidized housing, etc... This plus dying by the millions in fighting wars is a perfect example of that male privilege I hear about.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

This is a blatant injustice with so much abuse yet why is nothing being done to amend it in your country?


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

uhtred said:


> Yes, perfect birth control for men would solve the problem.
> 
> Condoms have multiple issues. They are not that reliable (I've had one break at an inopportune time). They also really do drastically diminish the sensation for men (don't know if they do for women).
> 
> Chemical birth control for men is more difficult than for women. For women, the normal cycle is adjusted so that women are never at a fertile stage. For men there is no equivalent natural cycle to modify.


No it wouldn't half of them wouldn't use it. Women have chemical birth control and that hasn't stopped it.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

marriageontherocks2 said:


> I've heard cases of a man dating a single mother for a year or so and she has won child support payments after taking him to court because he assumed a "fatherly role" in her child's life while they dated.


I got to see that.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

RandomDude said:


> This is a blatant injustice with so much abuse yet why is nothing being done to amend it in your country?


Not enough demand by men. We need to fight against this stuff.

At the very least he should be able to sue the genetic father and the mother.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

RandomDude said:


> This is a blatant injustice with so much abuse yet why is nothing being done to amend it in your country?


That is a really good question. I am no historian or social scientist. But when I think of the civil rights movement and what was achieved for back people, the equal rights movement for women... they were all grass roots efforts. I am all for non-violent protest, for several reasons, not the least of which is that they are effective, not leading to the distraction of the wrongs committed by the pretests themselves. WHO should be getting this done but US, the voters, the people of and for this government is supposed to be?

Historically the idea has been screw you horny little bastards, let's just do something to take care of the kids. Ok as far as it goes. Or not. But what representative looks around their constituency and says, hey let's make a list of injustices to remedy. WOA that is a big list. What do you want to tackle first?

Personally, my activism is on 2 main causes that touch my life directly. But I am always on the lookout for motion in the men's rights in the family court system. I think that this is vital not only to square injustice but in the social fabric of family in this country. So if you start a movement and are seeking support, feel more than free to proselytize to me!


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

sokillme said:


> No it wouldn't half of them wouldn't use it. Women have chemical birth control and that hasn't stopped it.


The point is to add tools in the men's toolbox to allow them to control their reproduction THEMSELVES in an effective and useful way. Hell I wish they had several to choose from so they can double, triple, quadruple up! When they have the power to control their reproductive like in a manner that does not simplify the issue to the absurd (don't have sex ever) then they have the power to choose. 

And really, defacto parent because you are around is stupid and needs to stop.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

That would depend on how it worked. If someone could take a pill, that had NO SIDE EFFECTS, and then not be able to get a woman pregnant for the next day, I'm sure most men would use it. 

In reality anything is likely to have side effects, the same way that birth control for women has side effects. For some people those effects are significant. 

Similarly men don't like condoms, not because they don't want to bother, but because they substantially ruin the physical sensations of sex. 




sokillme said:


> No it wouldn't half of them wouldn't use it. Women have chemical birth control and that hasn't stopped it.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

Vasectomy cheap, effective, long term. And really guys, can anyone afford more than an heir and a spare?


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

RandomDude said:


> This is a blatant injustice with so much abuse yet why is nothing being done to amend it in your country?


The simple answer? The good of the child. We don't have near the social services programs other countries do and the programs we do have are underfunded. Someone has to take care of the child. If the mother can't do it, the state can't offer enough help, well, then, the kid needs a legal daddy.



sokillme said:


> No it wouldn't half of them wouldn't use it. Women have chemical birth control and that hasn't stopped it.


Yes, but well know that A) not all women are using their birth control as directed and B) some women lie about being on birth control at all. If men had reliable internal device or hormonal birth control, problems A and B are solved. A woman can't accuse a man of being the baby daddy if there isn't a baby.



sokillme said:


> Not enough demand by men. We need to fight against this stuff.
> 
> At the very least he should be able to sue the genetic father and the mother.


As far as I am aware, civil suit can be brought in cases of paternity fraud.



RandomDude said:


> :scratchhead: How is birth control a solution?
> 
> A woman can just sleep with someone else, have a kid, and name you as father by default forcing you to pay child support or go to jail.


If men had reliable birth control in their own right, there would be far fewer pregnancies. No baby means no accusation of baby daddyhood.

Also, the news story wasn't entirely accurate and I thought I cleared that up in my first post. The Michigan courts DO NOT just name a man Father by Default. Not even when the mother reports a name to social services. There is a procedure. If a woman reports a man as father to social services, the case is sent to the court just like all other paternity cases. The man is summoned to court where he can either admit paternity and begin the process of establishing visitation and child support or he can deny paternity and be ordered to submit to a DNA test. The court summons clearly states that failure to act will be seen as not contesting paternity and that the man has until XXXX date to answer the summons or he will be named Father by Default. The court will also allow appeals of a Father by Default decision within (I believe, I'm going on old memory here) 60 or 90 days.

In reality, a lot of these guys named Father by Default simply avoided their summons, hoping it would all go away, and it didn't.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

MJJEAN said:


> If men had reliable birth control in their own right, there would be far fewer pregnancies. No baby means no accusation of baby daddyhood.
> 
> Also, the news story wasn't entirely accurate and I thought I cleared that up in my first post. The Michigan courts DO NOT just name a man Father by Default. Not even when the mother reports a name to social services. There is a procedure. If a woman reports a man as father to social services, the case is sent to the court just like all other paternity cases. The man is summoned to court where he can either admit paternity and begin the process of establishing visitation and child support or he can deny paternity and be ordered to submit to a DNA test. The court summons clearly states that failure to act will be seen as not contesting paternity and that the man has until XXXX date to answer the summons or he will be named Father by Default. The court will also allow appeals of a Father by Default decision within (I believe, I'm going on old memory here) 60 or 90 days.
> 
> In reality, a lot of these guys named Father by Default simply avoided their summons, hoping it would all go away, and it didn't.


Ah, thanks for clarifying. So they were pretty much idiots. Still, not sure if this idiocy warrants being unable to appeal the father by default decision past 90 days even after proving the child isn't even theirs and weren't even in a relationship with those women.



> The simple answer? The good of the child. We don't have near the social services programs other countries do and the programs we do have are underfunded. Someone has to take care of the child. If the mother can't do it, the state can't offer enough help, well, then, the kid needs a legal daddy.


Damn... think I'll stop complaining about my country now.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

uhtred said:


> That would depend on how it worked. If someone could take a pill, that had NO SIDE EFFECTS, and then not be able to get a woman pregnant for the next day, I'm sure most men would use it.


Talk about entitled. Someone has been used to letting someone else bear the responsibility for reproduction long enough not to be willing to consider ... GASP... side effects and efficacy past day. That kind of lessens the sympathy I have for the poor men whine in my book.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

RandomDude said:


> Ah, thanks for clarifying. So they were pretty much idiots. Still, not sure if this idiocy warrants being unable to appeal the father by default decision past 90 days even after proving the child isn't even theirs and weren't even in a relationship with those women.
> 
> 
> 
> Damn... think I'll stop complaining about my country now.


I don't know why, but there is this pervasive idea that as long as you don't show up for court then there can't be a ruling and the case will sit in limbo forever. It's absolute idiocy.

Here's another tidbit. MI's child support collection agency is called the Friend of the Court (FOC). Any child support paid outside of the FOC is legally considered a gift unless the words "for child support" appear on the check or money order or there is a cash payment with a receipt signed by the custodial parent that states they received $XXX for child support. In other words, if a man pays his baby momma child support outside the court system and doesn't notate that the payment was for child support, she can, at any time, sue him for child support and his support arrearages will be calculated as if he's never paid a dime.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

MJJEAN said:


> I don't know why, but there is this pervasive idea that as long as you don't show up for court then there can't be a ruling and the case will sit in limbo forever. It's absolute idiocy.


Is that not the case even as trivial as speeding tickets? IIRC a defendant is ruled guilty on a no show.


----------



## Windwalker (Mar 19, 2014)

Vasectomy, the best $150 you will ever spend. If you perform the required "Post OP" requirements. It's will protect the best investment you ever made.

No muss, no fuss.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

Less babies less paternity fraud. That makes as much sense as Less stores, less shoplifting, or less food, less overeating. We can solve all of our social problems this way.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Mr. Nail said:


> Less babies less paternity fraud. That makes as much sense as Less stores, less shoplifting, or less food, less overeating. We can solve all of our social problems this way.


I wonder that anyone thinks we can solve all our social problems at all. But if I were in a position to take control of my reproductive future, which I luckily am, I would be on it like white on rice. I have long thought that abstinence only education and stuffing education on birth control was a dumb idea in terms of combating teen aged pregnancy for instance. Are we going to eradicate teen pregnancy with education? No, of course not. Can we put the tool in our toolbox? Sure.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

Try my entire quote

That would depend on how it worked. If someone could take a pill, that had NO SIDE EFFECTS, and then not be able to get a woman pregnant for the next day, I'm sure most men would use it. 

In reality anything is likely to have side effects, the same way that birth control for women has side effects. For some people those effects are significant. 

Similarly men don't like condoms, not because they don't want to bother, but because they substantially ruin the physical sensations of sex. 


Quote:

Originally Posted by sokillme View Post
No it wouldn't half of them wouldn't use it. Women have chemical birth control and that hasn't stopped it.




How is that entitled. I'm pointing out that if birth control is simple and has no side effects, then the great majority of people will use it. If is isn't then many people will not use it. Applies to men and women. No appeal to sympathy. Lots of women don't use birth control because of the side effects - same for men. I don't see this as a gender issue. My wife never used BC for exactly that reason. 







NobodySpecial said:


> Talk about entitled. Someone has been used to letting someone else bear the responsibility for reproduction long enough not to be willing to consider ... GASP... side effects and efficacy past day. That kind of lessens the sympathy I have for the poor men whine in my book.


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Windwalker said:


> Vasectomy, the best $150 you will ever spend. If you perform the required "Post OP" requirements. It's will protect the best investment you ever made.
> 
> No muss, no fuss.


$150? Wish it were that cheap!


----------



## Windwalker (Mar 19, 2014)

Thor said:


> $150? Wish it were that cheap!


Good point. It is mind over matter Thor. 

To some people there is no price to costly. I have already told my boys, you want it done, I'll pay for it. $150? $1500? It's only money. The peace of mind CAN NOT be valued with a price tag!


----------



## Thor (Oct 31, 2011)

Next year for me. Might as well wait for the start of a new annual deductible. It will be money well spent whatever it costs. I'm expecting more than $1500 though.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

Vasectomy ey? Meh

I got away with it so far, because my:












Cept with ex-wife... but that was bc I didn't pull out.


----------

