Do I have to keep paying child support for child whom I'm not bio father?

Originally Posted by waiting for justice Sunlover, what about the father who has tried for the last 3 1/2 years ot see his child and the mother keeps brainwashing him. She has alientated this kid from his father. what about that? No one seems to think thats wrong. and to unregistered mind your own business.

It's anyones business honey when you post it on a PUBLIC forum!

[waiting for justice]

sun lover mind your own business if your not going to say something nice

Men are forced to pay all the time! It's sad! Here's an example that was in the news awhile back......

Published Wednesday, January 21, 2009


Army Master Sgt. Christopher Sprowson's deployment to Iraq in 2005 was complicated not by routine orders passed down in a war zone, but by the contents of a startling letter the state of Kansas sent to his wife.

The document from the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services ordered Sprowson to pay child support for a boy, born to his first wife a decade earlier, that genetic testing had already proven was fathered by someone else. The career soldier, based at Fort Riley, had divorced his first wife soon after the child was born. The boy is now 13.

Sprowson's current spouse, Karey Sprowson, contacted an SRS attorney for an explanation of the letter and to share the DNA evidence.

It made no difference.

"Under Kansas law," she said, "since he and the mother were married at the birth, he is the presumed father."

Karey Sprowson, who lives in Wakefield north of the sprawling military base, said it was time to inject common sense into the state's paternity statutes.

Today, she will appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on behalf of a bill that would allow a man presumed to be the father of a child to request a genetic test. Results of that analysis, according to the proposed new law, would be used by the court when assigning paternity. Provisions of the bill would apply to children younger than 18 years of age as of July 1.

Sen. Jim Barnett, R-Emporia, said he sponsored the legislation to inject "fairness" into a process that was damaging to the Sprowson family. He was contacted by Karey Sprowson because much of the legal wrangling in the case has transpired in Emporia.

Barnett said the Lyon County District Court's $325 monthly child support judgment against Christopher Sprowson was detrimental to the welfare of the couple's three children, who range in age from 10 years to 14 months.

"His real children have become victims of the courts," Barnett said.

Sen. Tim Owens, an Overland Park Republican and chairman of the judiciary committee, said the judicial branch was guided by statutes designed to prevent parental figures from avoiding responsibility for their children.

The proposed legislation could have a big impact on the handling of other paternity cases, he said.

Karey Sprowson, who is in charge of the family's paternity case while her husband serves a third tour in Iraq, said the legal drama had drained the couple's savings account. The family's 2008 income tax refund will be seized, she said.

The irony, Karey Sprowson said, was the boy's birth mother didn't want her ex-husband held liable.

"She went to court with us and told the SRS attorney that she didn't want child support from him and the he is not the child's father," Karey Sprowson said.

She said the boy has no relationship with Christopher Sprowson.

"While they are looking at the best interests of one child," she said, "they're not considering the best interests of all children. They're taking away from my children."



The bill was never passed...... The legislators basically said that they would look into it...blah blah blah... Wonder how fast they would "look into it" if it was happening to THEIR family!!!

I often hear people say similiar statements like "Doesn't the child deserve a father?"... "What about the person the child thought was their father"...etc...

While I do agree that every child deserves a father, do you really think forcing a man to pay child support for a child that is not his is going to make him be a father???

If a man stays and supports a child even after finding out the child isn't his biological child that's great, but forcing them to pay is not what makes them a father....

Originally Posted by Unregistered I often hear people say similiar statements like "Doesn't the child deserve a father?"... "What about the person the child thought was their father"...etc... While I do agree that every child deserves a father, do you really think forcing a man to pay child support for a child that is not his is going to make him be a father??? If a man stays and supports a child even after finding out the child isn't his biological child that's great, but forcing them to pay is not what makes them a father....

Very true. Paying for a child and actually being that child's parent are two totally separate things.

That said, no man who's been falsely led to believe he's the biological father of a child by a vindictive, unscrupulous woman should be forced to pay for a child that he's not biologically related to.

It's very sad that family court operates on greed, laziness and incompetence. It encourages, promotes, facilitates and condones the breaking apart of families and alienation of children with their fathers.

We no longer live in the type of society where the man is the bread-winner and the woman is the little woman with no job prospects. It's time the archaic family court realizes this.

Family court abuses the law and the constitution more so than any other court system. It's criminal, really.