My fathers' rights case

[Skyy God]

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

Did you even read the article you tard?

He SAID he knew he was going to lose, because of several precedents...His aim is to get to a federal court.

But thanks for your 'insight' into this issue.

Case is over. Apparently the OP is just venting.

We’re settling. My client is through. He can no longer continue to keep his life on hold, with the small, paper-thin chance he may have of getting standing. He wants to get over this long, painful relationship that Mom kept him in, that he stayed in because he loved her, and because he believed her when she said that she would get divorced and come home to him. He’s tired. And he’s out of money. And that’s the harsh reality.

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

Case is over. Apparently the OP is just venting.

Hmm...

[Skyy God]

Originally Posted by Pawnmower

Hmm...

The moral to this story: Don't impregnate a married women with the expectation you'll get parental rights.

The end.

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

The moral to this story: Don't impregnate a married women with the expectation you'll get parental rights.

The end.

Wow thanks for the enlightenment...maybe we should call you Captain Hindsight and you can come around and tell people not to make the mistakes they already made..

This could be your theme song:

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

The moral to this story: Don't impregnate a married women with the expectation you'll get parental rights.

The end.

You're so ****ed in the head.....it's funny.

[Skyy God]

Originally Posted by Pestilence

You're so ****ed in the head.....it's funny.

Let's say, hypothetically, he's successful and men in UT are granted the right to request a DNA test. You can see how it might be bad public policy in situations where the adulterer isn't the father. The family just got put through the ringer for no good reason.

[The Franchise]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

Let's say, hypothetically, he's successful and men in UT are granted the right to request a DNA test. You can see how it might be bad public policy in situations where the adulterer isn't the father. The family just got put through the ringer for no good reason.

So he should suffer because the woman is a whore?

[Window Licking Whiner]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

Let's say, hypothetically, he's successful and men in UT are granted the right to request a DNA test. You can see how it might be bad public policy in situations where the adulterer isn't the father. The family just got put through the ringer for no good reason.

That's not bad policy at all. If the woman is cheating, and gets pregnant during that timeframe...then she should be put through the ringer.

And if the guy is just pulling the affair out of his ass...well guess what if you have no leg to stand on then you will be liable for the legal fees incurred by the married couple.

Getting to the bottom of the biology of a child is never bad policy.

[Skyy God]

Originally Posted by gochiefs_va

That's not bad policy at all. If the woman is cheating, and gets pregnant during that timeframe...then she should be put through the ringer.

And if the guy is just pulling the affair out of his ass...well guess what if you have no leg to stand on then you will be liable for the legal fees incurred by the married couple.

Getting to the bottom of the biology of a child is never bad policy.

UT family court, circa 2014.

[Window Licking Whiner]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

Let's say, hypothetically, he's successful and men in UT are granted the right to request a DNA test. You can see how it might be bad public policy in situations where the adulterer isn't the father. The family just got put through the ringer for no good reason.

So men inside of marriages, are they not put through the ringer when a single woman claims he (the husband) fathered her child? Cause that happens every single day...yet because it's a woman you dont want to put the 'family' through that? Call it what it is..you dont want the woman to be put through that, yet you dont even mention the fact that men inside of marriages are put through that every single day(whether he did or didnt have an affair). That's the whole point of my case. Only men get put through the ringer...woman are protected by archaic laws like this.

Make it fair. If someone like me (a single person) asking for a paternity test of someone inside a marriage is intrusive....then it should go both ways. For men and for women.

[Skyy God]

Originally Posted by gochiefs_va

So men inside of marriages, are they not put through the ringer when a single woman claims he (the husband) fathered her child? Cause that happens every single day...yet because it's a woman you dont want to put the 'family' through that? Call it what it is..you dont want the woman to be put through that, yet you dont even mention the fact that men inside of marriages are put through that every single day(whether he did or didnt have an affair). That's the whole point of my case. Only men get put through the ringer...woman are protected by archaic laws like this.

Make it fair. If someone like me (a single person) asking for a paternity test of someone inside a marriage is intrusive....then it should go both ways. For men and for women.

Fairness isn't the goal, adulterer, it's the welfare of the child.

But you clearly have a problem understanding this concept.

[Ming the Merciless]

Originally Posted by Pittsie

Case is over. Apparently the OP is just venting.

I dont know, perhaps he changed his mind?

So those of you who read the comments to these posts know that the client I referred to in my previous post about a paternity law case changed his mind about settling. (Through some settlement negotiations Mom agreed to, and FINALLY posted a picture of the baby on her family blog. This child looks so much like his Dad that if he is NOT my client’s, I will run naked through the street.