more paternity fraud...question

OK, I know this is a problem and studies have shown that quite a number of sprogs are not the so called dads... and another study showed that the greater the number of kids, the more likely the later kids are to be some other guys as well.
Does ANYONE know of a false paternity case (in modern days and times where tests can be done) where a moo named a guy who had never even been in bed with her? Hadn't touched her in any way? How about just picking some guy whom she had never even seen before? Anyone know of any case??
REALLLLLY curious.

two cents ¢¢

ok this is what it says

http://home.earthlink.net/~elnunes/blood.htm

Any woman can name any man as the father of her child and she or the government can sue him for support on behalf of the child. He then bears the burden of proof that he was not the father with the further monetary costs of testing and litigation.

Until the late 1980's, the only way that a man could dispute paternity was with proof of impossible contact (usually ignored by many courts), lack of fertility (sterility, vasectomy - also ignored), and ABO blood typing. Even when ABO blood typing excluded a man, some courts ignored the evidence and ascribed to paternity to him.

this is all i can find at the moment, but i will keep looking

There is an oral swab dna test that is commonly used to determine the paternity of a child. It is relativly cheap.

http://www.reason.com/0402/fe.mw.injustice.shtml

There were excellent reasons to think so. He had never met or heard of the mother of the child. He had never lived in Northern California, and at the time of conception (spring 1991) he was attending the University of California at Santa Barbara, beginning a monogamous relationship that would last for two years. What’s more, he’s a condom fanatic -- only once in his life, Pierce swears, has he failed to use a rubber during intercourse, and that was "many years after." (He’s been a friend of mine for 15 years, and I believe him.) And if the summons had included the mother’s testimony (it was supposed to, but did not), he would have seen himself described as a "tall" and "dark" black man named "Anthony Pierce." Pierce is a hair over five feet, nine inches; he is so light-skinned that even people who know him sometimes don’t realize he’s black; and no one calls him Anthony except his mom.


it has happened, and this was in november 2000, basically they can claim its you, but then its up to you to prove you arent, and in some states there is a time limit,

yes, scary

it gets worse

What if the only information the mother provides, I ask Gerhenzon, is that it was 10 years ago, with a white guy named Matt Welch, now between 30 and 40 years old, who maybe lives in the Los Angeles area?

"In that case, now it depends," she says. "We run our search on him; if we come back with one Matt Welch who lives in L.A., whose birthday fits that 10-year range, and we have nobody else, we presume in general we have the person. If we come back with three Matt Welches, all of a sudden we know there’s a problem. We have to call her back in, or call her on the phone, and say ‘OK, here’s what we’ve pulled up. We need more help from you to identify which is the correct [one].’"

So a name, race, vague location, and a broad age range is sufficient to launch a process that could quickly lead to a default judgment, asset liens, and a blocked passport? "Right. Right," Gerhenzon confirms. "If it’s clear that she’s given us enough identifying information to come up with one discrete name, we would go ahead." Wouldn’t that make people with unusual names easier targets? "Absolutely."

That’s how a man like Taron James could be slapped with a support bill for thousands of dollars from Los Angeles County in 2002, and continue to be barred from using his notary public license, even after producing convincing DNA evidence and notarized testimony from the mother that her 11-year-old son, whom he’s seen exactly once and looks nothing like, is not his child and that she no longer seeks his support. James says his name was placed on the child’s birth certificate without his consent while he was on a Navy tour of duty; then the mother refused to take blood tests for eight years, and he became aware of a default order against him only when the Department of Motor Vehicles refused to issue him a driver’s license in October 1996. By that time, James had missed all the relevant deadlines, the court was unimpressed with his tale of woe, and he has since coughed up $14,000 in child support via liens and garnishments.

This is such an egregious travesty, it's hard o believe it can happen. do you know if there is anyone trying to effect a change in the law? Several years ago, there was an organization called Fathers United or something like that. Their original purpose was to reunite fathers with children that had been withheld from them by vengeful mothers but later on, they broadened their area to other issues effecting fathers. It seems this is something that would be worth taking on.

there are a few laws in the works, but how long that takes god knows..even so its so skewed that you have to sue the government agency that claims you are a father and you wouldnt get a penny back from them at all..

Looks like I hit a nerve.

everything i posted is true, and thats what makes it scarier than other stuff.

in theory any woman in america could put ur name as the father, and if you dont respond within 30 days, (even if they dont tell you you are named).. you are the father.. even if you prove by dna testing that you arent. it doesnt matter, you still are in law the father.. oh yes, terrifying for all males especially in america.

I remember reading about that a few years back. It was either in the L.A. Times or the Daily News. If I remember correctly- don't hold me to this- the ACLU got involved on behalf of the mothers. Once they're into something, good luck even trying to see the sense of it.