To the Honorable -----
Dear ------------,
In many divorces
involving child support, there is the occurrence of fraud in the determination
of which male should pay child support. This is because the mother is able and
willing, with the help of the State, to secure child support payments from the
man she is divorcing by perjuring herself regarding the true paternity of the
children born during her marriage. Often, for the woman it is a revenge factor
used against the man she is divorcing. She may justify her fraud with the
excuse that she is doing it "for the children". Fraud is a crime. A
crime committed "for the children" is still a crime. In fact this
perjury becomes a criminal act against her children.
The following ideas could
help eliminate the possibility of paternity fraud and correct other problems
inherent in Family Law Statutes.
1)
In divorce cases involving children and child support,
mandatory paternity testing should be initiated by the Court, except for
adopted children and children from a previous marriage.
a)
If testing shows that the divorcing husband is not the
father of one or more of the children, a good faith effort should made to find the
biological father and require him to pay child support.
b)
If the biological father is deceased or cannot be
located, the husband may make informed consent to pay child support, but should
not be required to pay child support. If he consents to pay child support, he
may elect at any time to cease paying child support upon sixty days notice to
the mother and the court
2)
A Statute of Law allowing restitution in past divorce
cases where child support was paid and where later evidence proves that the
husband was not the father of the child in question.
a)
The amount of the restitution should be the entire amount
paid for the child in question, plus interest. The amount should be calculated
by setting up a schedule where each child support payment should be treated as
if it were a deposit into a savings account at compound interest.
3)
Creation of a program to enforce restitution as part of
the State’s Department of Revenue Child Support Enforcement Agency in cases
where there has been fraud or error in divorces which occurred before required
paternity testing.
a)
If the mother of the child/ren offers restitution without
requiring the ex-husband to bring a petition or motion in front of the Court,
the interest rate used should be six percent and the compounding should be monthly.
i)
Criminal proceedings against the mother for fraud would
be disallowed.
b)
If the ex-husband has to bring a petition or motion
before the Court to request restitution and the mother of the child/ren agrees
without counter-argument, the interest rate used should be eight percent and
the compounding should be monthly.
i)
Criminal proceedings against the mother for fraud would
be disallowed.
ii) If the ex-husband
requests restitution before the Court and the mother files counter petitions to
fight restitution, the interest rate should be ten percent, and the compounding
should be semi-monthly or weekly (depending on the payment frequency in the
original child support order). In this instance, it shall be mandated that the
mother will bear all costs for paternity testing and court costs, including
attorney fees for the ex-husband.
iii) Criminal proceedings for
Felony Perjury Findings against the mother for fraud would be automatically
instituted by the State’s Attorney’s Office.
c)
The above restitution schedules will not bar the
defrauded father, or the child (either during minority or at majority) in
proceeding with a civil damages lawsuit against the mother.
d)
The amount of prior paid child support (principal and
interest) would be paid in a lump sum to the ex-husband.
i)
If a lump sum is not feasible, the mother’s wages would
be garnisheed at the same percentage rate of previous child support payments,
ii) The mother would be
subject to the same actions for non-payment as a person not paying child
support; i.e.;
loss of drivers license,
loss of professional licenses,
seizure of IRS tax refunds,
seizure of worker’s compensation and other
insurance moneys,
seizure of retirement, IRA, and Keogh funds
seizure of bank accounts and personal property
subject to jail time for
contempt of court for non-payment of Court-ordered
restitution.
Modifying Family Law Statutes
as outlined above will ensure the rights of the child/ren involved, establish
parity for ex-husbands’ in Family Court, and be in the “Bests interests of the
Child”.
Sincerely,