On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 05:40:21 -0500, "RogerN" wrote:

I don't get this about someone ordered to pay CS, and later they find out
that it's not their child. How can that person still be responsible for CS
for a child that isn't his? Isn't that equivalent to throwing someone in
prison, later on finding out that they were innocent, and saying "someone
needs to serve time for that, might as well be you"? This doesn't mean the
father was messing around, it means the mother was messing around. How can
this get so completely turned around? All of a sudden we have guilty even
though proven innocent.

I just don't understand!

Roger N


It is not fair to the non-father paying the CS. But you may have
heard that life ain't always fair either. They justify it for a lot
of reasons, but the one I like best is that if you are dumb enough to
marry the whore, then you deserve to pay for all her ******* children.

Seriously, with the DNA invention, they need to change the rules.
Right now, there is a possibility of getting out of CS in some states
if you jump through all the hoops, but it is quite difficult and
expensive. Instead they should make it easier on the husband and upon
first showing the child is not his, stop his CS immediately.