A case of paternity fraud

January 26, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

Actions and consequences for a duped and defrauded father.

The following is a response to a complaint about real case of paternity fraud in the US. The names and locations have been altered to protect the victims of the fraud.

The man who wrote the original complaint is experiencing the whole gamut of the weapons of the divorce industry:

• Paternity fraud;
• Child abduction and move-away by the mother (involving an eight-hour trip - one way - by the father if he wishes to see the child whom he has come to see as his own);
• False allegations of domestic violence, to keep they alleged fathers at bay and away;
• The defrauded man duped into paternity;
• The mother of the child refuses any child access to the alleged father;
• The defrauded father has become very strongly bonded to a child who is not his, for whom he pays child support, but a child whom he no longer gets to see, and more.

If anyone reading about that case here has any good advice or pointers, please post a comment to this blog entry.

Here is my response to the man’s complaint:

Hello Bill,

Sorry for your troubles, but thanks for writing.

Don’t blame your misfortune so much on a miscarriage of justice due to your lawyer’s ineptitude as on a justice system in which the cards are stacked against you.  That is because you are a man.  The family-law system hates men.

That is nothing personal, but the more difficulties men encounter due to the justice system, the more money the players who inhabit the system and make it thrive can extract from men.  Family law grew into a social cancer.

The most important thing you can do is to get in touch with a fathers-rights organization in Flatbush, Tennessee.

It is highly likely, almost certain, that you must file your case in a Tennessee court, as Flatbush is the place of residence of the biological parents of your child.

However, do everything you can to keep the case out of family court. Family courts were a response by the legal system to the large back-log of divorce applications that occurred in the 1960’s as a consequence of the implementation of the concept of “no-fault” divorce (in whom the fault for the divorce is always placed squarely on the shoulders of the man). Family courts are not in existence to help families and to dispense justice for families.  They exist to pursue their original reason for existence: to help speed up the destruction of families.  In family courts the precepts of normal courts — to follow the rules of the courts and the rules of evidence, your right to be judged a jury of your peers, your right to face your accuser, your right to own property, your right the enjoy the earnings of your labour and your right not to be forced into indentured labour and not to have you forced into forking over your earnings to third parties — have all been abrogated and no longer apply.

You need to get in touch with that fathers-rights organization in Flatbush to learn from them what you can do to help your case.  You will most likely learn more from them than you can learn from a lawyer.  More importantly, you can ask them and learn from them how to go about finding a lawyer that can help you the best to win your case.  However, your chances of winning are slim.  That is because you are a man.  The system hates men.

That was in relation to your wish to obtain custody of your daughter.

As to what you must do to get compensation from your lawyer and to get him punished or fined for lack of action, for botching your case, and for being a bad lawyer all around, you will have to file that case in New York.  That case will have to be brought to court in New York, perhaps in New York State.

I do not know who in New York will be able to help you.  I am not aware of a fathers rights activist who may be able to point you into the right direction on that.  It will not hurt you to ask more fathers rights activist about it.

A word on your choice of lawyer in the very specialized field of family law:  Family law is not specialized because lawyers receive much training in family law (at some universities, family law is covered in no more than a day), but because it has become a sector of the justice system that, along with many other government bureaucracies nurtured by and living off it, grew into an enormously large and profitable industry that mainly extracts money from men and pretends that is justice, all under the excuse that it all is “in the best interest of the child.”

The relationship between you and any lawyer working for you is like that with any other contractor you hire. You are the boss and pay the bills and his wages.

A lawyer works for you according to your plan, your schedule, your objectives, your instructions and your supervision.  For you to miss out in any of those aspects is an invitation to disaster and much like giving the lawyer a signed, blank cheque.

Moreover, you must select and choose a lawyer like you would any other contractor.  With a construction or building-renovation project you may engage in a formal and tender and bidding process.  You would receive bids for a given job from more than one contractor.  You would evaluate the bids and pick the most promising contractor.  If you were not to do that, you would have no assurance that the contractor you hired would be the best for the job you want him to do.  If you don’t follow a similar process when hiring a lawyer, then there is no possible way that you can be sure to have hired the best lawyer possible.

As to going by the recommendation of someone who said you should pick that lawyer, “good advice” like that is cheap, and it is worth to you what you pay for it, but it may be worth more to the party offering the “good advice.”  Medical doctors pay a referral fee to other doctors who bring clients their way.  I don’t know whether lawyers operate that way, but I would be surprised if they did not.

As to how to find a fathers-rights organization, go to http://www.dvmen.org/dv-190.htm#help

Some general observations:

Given that your daughter is not your biological child, although you were duped into believing that she was, that will cause some special problems for you.  It appears obvious that you were duped in order to make you become involved in a strong emotional bond with your daughter.

The fact that the bond now exists lays you open to blackmail and extortion by the biological parents of the child.  Moreover, because you openly accepted the child as your own and are now even fighting for her custody and that of her sister, you are legally the father of that child and of her sister.

In all likelihood you will be paying child support until the girl comes of age or until she finishes her education, whichever comes later.  Yet, you may not ever see her again.  The “legal” system will insist that that is in the best interest of the child — not only that, but that your daughter is entitled to the level of comfort she became accustomed to while still in your care.  That means also that the child support amount will be increased over the years as your income increases.  It will be said that that is necessary because she would have the increase in the level of comfort if she were still with you, and that those increases in child support payments, too, are in the best interest of the child.

Moreover, it is relatively easy now to make you the father of not only the girl whom you believed was your daughter, but also of the one that clearly and quite openly was not your child.  That doubles the stakes in the game that you became involved in.

If the biological parents are in the state of existence you described, they will have a very strong interest in having you make those ever-increasing child support payments for as long as possible.  In fact, as far as they are concerned, the best thing that could happen would be for them to have your daughter(s) go to university for as long as possible.  They could well afford that, because you will be paying for it.

Your child support payments will be their major source of income.  It will be far better than receiving a government disability pension, and it is possible for them to use the power of the State to make sure the money you are able to pay will keep coming their way.

That will motivate the parents to refuse to hand the child(ren) over to you.  Against their resistance it will most likely be impossible for you to gain custody of your daughter(s).  The parents will have lawyers beating a path to their door to help them fight your application to gain custody.  You will be paying your lawyer out of your own resources.  Their lawyers will be paid out of the bottomless public purse.  You will therefore fight against an opponent with unlimited financial resources.

Under those circumstances it will be difficult for you to maintain the pretense that the girl is your daughter.  You will have little or no feedback from her to re-enforce your bond with her.  The question now is for how long you can keep up the pretense that the child is your daughter.  When that pretense ends, the child support you are paying will be seen by you for what it is, extortion money that you must pay because you were duped and defrauded.

If you were to consider all of that, you should then not fight for custody but for recognition of what happened.  You were duped and defrauded.  That is a crime.

You are not the father of that child, and you should fight to have your status cancelled of having been made the father through fraud.  Your legal paternity is a fraud.

If you were to base your future actions on the fact of that fraud and if you were to attempt to put an end to it, you would have a very small but slightly better chance to have your paternity declared null and void than you have to gain custody of one or both of the girls.

All the best,

Walter Schneider
http://fathersforlife.org

Posted in Paternal Rights, Paternity Fraud | Print | 2 Comments »

CBC debate on The Meaning of Fatherhood

January 16, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

CBC News: Sunday airs on CBC-TV at 10:00am, and on CBC Newsworld at 9:00am (ET)

Jan. 10, 2009

The Meaning of Fatherhood
Comments (70)

The Ontario Superior Court’s decision to order a man to continue paying child support - even though he is not the biological father of his ex-wife’s twins - has renewed the debate over father’s rights in Canada. We talk to Judith Huddart, a Toronto lawyer specializing in family law, and Grant Wilson, whose organization opposes the judgment, about the implications of this week’s decision.

The video (about 10 minutes) and the comments that were sent in are accessible at http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/2009/01/011109_6.html

Some may wonder why I posted this item as belonging to the category of “Women’s Violence”, amongst others.  The reasons are simple.

(Update 2009 01 17 1:08 a.m.: The text following this note was posted as a comment to the article at the CBC website.  I received an acknowledgment stating that the comment had been received and thanking me for posting it.  Curiously, nine hours after my comment had been received by the CBC it had not yet been shown.  One would almost think that the comment shown below violates some unspecified speech code.  I wonder.)

It is an act of violence against a man to pretend that he is the natural father of children when he is not.

It is an act of violence against children to deny them to get to know and to be cared for by their natural father.

Grant Wilson said things very well, without identifying that a woman who conceived two children by a man she was not married to committed adultery.  On the other hand, Judith Huddard thought that to be quite normal and not necessarily malicious, as a woman who conceives a child by a man who is not her husband could easily have forgotten whom all she had sex with.

Going by what Judith Huddard stated, marital fidelity does not matter, but all that matters is that a man who has been fingered to be the natural father of two children should be held responsible to pay for the consequences of him being successfully duped.  By her reasoning, that is all that matters, as it is the right of the children to receive child support from a man who is not their father.  According to her, child support is paid to children and not to the children’s mothers.

I have got news for Judith Huddard.  The name of the mother of the children is on the child-support checks she receives.  Nowhere does it state what she must do with the money.  She can do with it what she wants, and she will not be held accountable for how she spends that money.

According to the judge in my own case, with respect to child support that I had to pay for children who had been abducted for eight years, the money for the child support arrears had to be paid to the mother, not to the children, because child support is the income of the mother.

Posted in Paternal Rights, Social-Destruction Enterprise, Propaganda Exposed, Women's Violence, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

Family court to men - ‘Just shut up and pay’

January 12, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

National Post [Canada]

January 12, 2009

Lorne Gunter: Family court to men - ‘Just shut up and pay’

There is perhaps no area of law in which logic is so distorted as family law. Men are seen as only two things: deadbeats or moneybags.

Consider the case of Pasqualino Cornelio.

Mr. Cornelio is a Toronto man who was ordered before Christmas to continue paying child support to his ex-wife, even after it was proven the couple’s twin girls were fathered by another man with whom the former Mrs. Cornelio had had an extramarital affair while the couple was still together….(Full Story)

Posted in Child Support, Paternal Rights, Divorce, Men's Issues, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

Paternity Fraud in Sweden

January 10, 2009 by Walter Schneider.

The Local — Sweden’s News in English

Woman swaps dad after 43 years

Published: 10 Jan 09 10:54 CET

A 43-year-old woman swapped father during the week. Lund district court ruled that the man that she had grown up with and had recognized as her dad her whole life was no longer her father, Skånska Dagbladet reports….(Full Story)

Posted in Paternal Rights, Men's Issues, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

Female innocence, chastity and fidelity largely a myth

December 11, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The appended articles show that female innocence, chastity and fidelity are more rare, by far, than most people claim it is.

All along we heard assertions to the contrary, too good to be true, but that anyone believes them is due to the effectiveness and all-pervasiveness of feminist propaganda.

What is going on?  To learn about the reasons for the wide difference between false assertions and reality with respect to the issue, read: Adultery is not abuse, and women don’t lie?

However, to come back to the forwarded articles, if women truly cheat more often than men do, and if men do not cheat on average as often as women do, then only two conclusion offer themselves to pick from:

1. Women are more likely to cheat with women than men are to cheat with men, but that was not mentioned in either article;
2. The lucky men who got all that sexual enjoyment on the side were not part of the samples studied in the surveys the forwarded articles reported on.  That, too, was not mentioned in the two forwarded articles. Besides, only about 1.5 percent of people engage habitually in homosexual sex acts. They would never be able to control the survey results (even though they increasingly control our laws and lives).

It seems that the study that was the base of the New Scientist article discussed in “Adultery is not abuse, and women don’t lie?” got it right.

In the vast and overwhelming majority of cases it takes two (of the opposite sex) to tangle, so much so that it becomes the controlling factor in the respective rates of cheating by the sexes.  Women and men are equally promiscuous, regardless of what sexist spin the feminist-dominated and -controlled media put on cheating and promiscuity.  What do you think?

–Walter

—Appended Articles—

news.com.au
10 December 2008

Young British women are more promiscuous than their male counterparts and more likely to be unfaithful

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24778949-401,00.html

British survey reveals young women more promiscuous than men

- British women have more sexual partners
- Average of nine lovers by age 21
- Most lost virginity by age 16

Young women are no longer just lying back and thinking of England, they are actively seeking out sexual partners - even more so than men.

A survey has revealed young British women are more promiscuous than their male counterparts and more likely to be unfaithful.

The study of 2000 women in the UK, commissioned by More magazine <http://www.moremagazine.co.uk/>, found that by the age of 21, women have had an average of nine sexual partners - two more than their male partner.

It also found a quarter of young women have slept with more than 10 partners in the first five years since losing their virginity, compared with 20 per cent of young men.

More magazine editor Lisa Smosarski said: “Our results show today’s twenty-something women are taking control of their sex lives and getting what they want in bed.”

The average age at which respondents lost their virginity was 16.

More than half of respondents said they were not in love with the person they lost their virginity to and only 32 per cent believed it was important to be in love with someone before they had sex with them.

But if a woman met someone she really liked, 56 per cent would make him wait “a month or more” before she would have sex with him.

Of the women surveyed, 50 per cent admitted they had cheated on a partner and half of those had been unfaithful at least twice.

Only 25 per cent said they had a partner who cheated on them.

If a man did cheat, 99 per cent of young women would dump him.

Indicating the influence of Britain’s tabloid newspapers, 60 per cent of women said they would “kiss and tell” for money if they had a one-night stand with someone famous.

The survey results were released less than a fortnight after an academic study found British citizens were the most promiscuous of any large western industrial nation, while Australians ranked fifth.

————————————

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24783395-5006301,00.html

The Advertiser (Adelaide)
11 December 2008

Australian Society for Human Biology sex research on young virgins
By Clare Peddie, Science Reporter

First-born girls are not as quick to cast off their virginity as their younger sisters, research has found.

An Australasian Society for Human Biology conference in Adelaide yesterday heard the order in which children are born into a family affects their reproductive behaviour later in life.

Previous research has shown firstborn children tend to be more confident and family-oriented while the middle-born children have the toughest time.

Now it seems there are differences when it comes to reproductive strategies, including the age at which they first have sex, their first pregnancy and first birth.

Middle-born children stand out in the survey results, with females 2.6 times more likely to fall pregnant at any given age.

Middle-born males have sex for the first time at a younger age than their brothers.

But middle-born children of both sexes tend to have fewer children of their own and last-born females are younger when they have sex for the first time.

Researcher Fritha Milne, from the University of Western Australia, says her work confirms that the first five years of a child’s life are crucial.

“During this time the young must elicit support and resources from the parents,” she said.

“If there are any siblings, then the siblings have to compete for the limited resources of the parents. In order to maximise the resources that the children get they have to find themselves a different niche within the family to get those resources from the parents.” The first child of three herself, Ms Milne says first-borns tend to “align themselves with the parental status quo”, which partly explains why she followed in the footsteps of her father, Associate Professor Nick Milne.

Professor Milne says his daughter’s research is “really interesting”.

“It gives some insight into people’s behaviour and allows you to see that some of the behaviours displayed by later-born children could be just an adaptation to their place in the world,” he said.

——————-

The views expressed in the forwarded article(s) are provided for information and do not necessarily represent those of the sender.

——————-

Information is nothing in and of itself.  The information provided via Manumit is provided to facilitate and stimulate ideas and action.

——————-

To discuss this article/info further join and/or go to ManumiTalk at:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/manumitalk/

——————-

Resources:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/manumit/files/manumitlinks.htm

——————-

To subscribe to MANUMIT, send an email to:
manumit-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

Posted in Health, Media Bias, Men's Issues, Family, Propaganda Exposed, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

67 DV Homicides in Wisconsin in ‘06-07

October 2, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The Capital Times

Grim report shows 67 domestic violence homicides in state in ‘06-07

Jessica VanEgeren  —  10/02/2008 9:23 am

Two years ago in Fond du Lac, a 43-year-old woman was killed by her husband. The weapon of choice: a cinder block. Earlier that year in Marathon County, a 40-year-old woman was beaten and strangled. She died at the hands of her husband after a piece of broken glass from a candy dish was stuffed down her throat….(Full Story)

That first paragraph in the article sets the stage.  After that, it doesn’t matter all that much anymore that the rest of the article is very careful to avoid  breaking down the fatality victims into men, women and children.

Perhaps there is a reason for that.  Maybe it is an interesting bit of truth that peeked through a chink in the armor of obfuscation in the article:

58 children under the age of 18 were left orphaned or without a mother or father as a result of domestic violence. Of the young children who lost a parent, 28 percent lost their mothers.

That means that 16 children lost their mothers and 42 lost their fathers.  The article provides no further clue as to what the proportions were of men and women who became DV murder victims.  Going by the proportion of the children who lost mothers and who lost fathers, the ratio of fathers to mothers killed is 2.6 fathers for every mother. That says nothing about who the perpetrators were.  However, the mothers’ ex-boyfriends or ex-husbands seem to have been the perpetrators in a good number of cases.

Does that mean that Wisconsin has almost three times as many battered men’s shelters as it has battered women’s shelters?  I don’t think so.  As far as I know, all of the Wisconsin shelters for victims of domestic violence are for women only.

Furthermore, the remedy for the victims of domestic violence is as follows:

Patti Seger, the executive director of the Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence, said getting victims to the point where they are ready to leave their abusers is an ongoing challenge.

The odd thing is that “getting victims to the point where they are ready to leave their abusers” appears to be exactly the trigger that causes much of the serious or deadly violence in the first place.

Given the fact that there is no battered men’s shelter in Wisconsin, the victims Patti Seger spoke about are all women. So, the solution to creating the love and respect necessary between spouses to prevent themselves or their ex-lovers from beating each other to death is to isolate them from one another, to make them separate, to have the victims leave their abusers, to get divorces.

There is a culture of violence that boys and girls are being indoctrinated with from the time before Kindergarten.

It seems to me that girls are no longer being urged to be lady-like but to be more like boys, even to be “as strong” as boys, which is, given that boys hardly ever defend themselves, not all that hard to do when it comes to that.

It happens far more often now that a girl is encouraged to be violent, and every time one slaps a boy in the face, gives him a black eye or two, or kicks him in the genitals, there is little reproach and more likely a resounding “Good for you! There you go, girl!”  That, as the years go by, is then being followed up with other lessons for such violent girls, by which they learn that in the eyes of the law they can do no wrong and that they can even commit murder with impunity.

On the other hand, it is more typical of society to teach boys who are old enough to play in a sandbox, “Boys don’t hit girls!”  That is then being followed up with lessons that teach boys and young men that they never, under any circumstance, may be violent to a woman, that there is never an excuse for them.

The other day, when I asked her whether her son was still single, the mother of a young man told me, “Yup, he is, but that is better than being black and blue all the time.”

Whenever something did not please her, his girlfriend whom he had lived with for a few years beat him black and blue on a regular basis, scratched up his immaculate truck, kicked in the truck’s head- and tail lights and slashed the truck’s tires.

The young man’s mother told me,

He got rid of her and now she is with X [a young man whom we both know and who had a few years ago been the victim of a serious paternity fraud] and is continuing the same violent behaviour with him. Fortunately I taught him [her son] all his life not ever to hit a woman.  At least he did not go to jail and he doesn’t have a criminal record for defending himself, but he is better off single than being constantly black and blue; and, thankfully, there are no children.

At what time in their lives do people learn to give and take respect for one another?  There is one thing that is certain in that regard. At least society tried, until the feminists and their fellow-travellers usurped power and control and began to create the rift between the sexes.

Posted in Censorship, Divorce, Media Bias, Paternal Rights, Judiciary, Health, Men's Issues, The New World Order, Women's Violence, Feminism, Feminist Jurisprudence, Family, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

Why we need a men’s movement

September 22, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Angry Harry put up links to excellent videos at his website.  You need to see those. (The first items listed at the top of the home page.)

1. The first video, “Why we need a men’s movement”, and its related short video clips, address the consequences of years and decades of discrimination against men.
2. The second set of videos is about the causes of discrimination against men.  Those are ten free segments of  a full documentary (available for sale on a CD by indoctrinate-u.com) that relate to the abrogation of academic freedom, but also illuminate many other issues, such as the lack of men’s studies programs, while women’s studies programs abound.

Both sets of videos are specific to the US.  However, anyone who has been following the evolution of feminist social engineering can affirm that the all-out promotion of women’s programs only and the loss of academic freedom are generic and universal problems that affect primarily all developed nations.

Posted in Organizational News, Suicides, Men's Issues, Feminism, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

How to select a lawyer

September 13, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

You just broke up with your wife or girlfriend (or, more likely, she broke up with you - no difference);   have one or more children, don’t know what to do and can’t afford the retaining fee your lawyer wants before she or he starts to work for you.

I received requests for help and advice in so many cases like that over the years, that I began to type up what are in effect generic answers to generic questions.  Here is a typical case from the mail box of Fathers for Life.

Kevin Jamieson [not his real name] wrote:

Hi my name is Kevin Jamieson, I’m emailing you because I need some advice/help. I am 23 years old, I have  son that’s 2 1/2. His mother and I are no longer together and my name isn’t on his birth certificate, giving me no rights. I have sought counsel, and she needs a $2000 retainer fee to get started which I do not have. However, she did refer me to Father’s For Life through a man in my community. I have been waiting for a while for there to be a meeting but there hasn’t been one for sometime. In the meantime I had been able to see my son whenever because my ex and I were trying to work things out. This all changed when she physically assaulted me in my home. She is facing three charges and I can have no contact with her. Now the only way I see my son is by setting up visits with her brother. I am confused and hurt. I would like advice on how to do the process of getting my name on the birth certificate on my own, as well as getting regular visits where I can have my own time with him. Please let me know if you can help me.

Sincerely

Kevin

I would need your location to be able to refer you to a fathers rights organizations close to your home.

Usually I provide generic advice, such as this, to someone in your circumstances.

I will address a few issues that appear in your message.

1. How do you know he is your son?  The only way you can be sure of that is to have a DNA test done.  Don’t be fooled by what you see in your boy.  People have a tendency of seeing what they wish to see.  The fact is that in your circumstances the chance that the boy is yours is on average only about two against one. (Check some of the articles at Paternity Fraud)
2. “…my name isn’t on his birth certificate, giving me no rights.”  That is generally but not absolutely true.  Even fathers who do have their name on a birth certificate find that, upon separation, when she doesn’t want the man who is alleged to have fathered her child to have any rights, the father will find that he has no rights.
   There is very little remedy in the law.  What little there is varies from location to location, that is, from state to state, from province to province and from country to country.
   In general, if you assumed the boy to be your son, and if that can be shown to have been the case (even if you know that you are not the biological father), you will be held to be responsible and accountable for the child(ren).  Even though you may not be allowed to see the child, you will still have to pay for him.  The courts hold that to be in the best interest of the child.  In reality, it is not you, as a father, that matters but the taxes you will be forced to pay for having dared to want to be a father.  The legal principle behind that is called estoppel. Fathers for Life contains a few articles describing the circumstances of estoppel in more detail.
3. “I have sought counsel, and she needs a $2000 retainer fee to get started which I do not have.”
   Without paying a retainer you are not likely to be able to hire that lawyer.  Still, if you cannot afford a retainer, how can you afford to pay for what else she would have to do?  Costs are on average in the order of about $10,000.  If the separation and custody fight becomes bitter, you can easily face upwards from $30,000 in lawyer fees (and you will quite possibly have to pay her legal and layer fees as well).
   It is not likely that you can find a lawyer who will work for you for nothing.  Divorce and custody fights are their bread and butter.  There is an exception.  If you cannot afford a $2,000 retainer, you may qualify for a Legal Aid lawyer.  If so, make sure to get one before your ex does.  Only one Legal Aid lawyer will work on a given case.
4. “However, she did refer me to Father’s For Life through a man in my community.”
   I don’t know why she did so.  At first glance it would seem that she did because she is honest.  If so, she deserves credit for that.  At any rate, look up the articles identified through the first link in my response.
   It is not very likely that you can determine all by yourself what the names of the best lawyers are in your area that deal with such issues.  You need to do as I said.  Get in touch with one or more local fathers rights organizations, talk to their members and find out through them which lawyers would be best.  Then you will have to apply the evaluation and selection procedures I described in those two articles.
5. “She is facing three charges and I can have no contact with her.”
   Facing charges?  Have charges been filed against her?  Make sure that is the case.  However, don’t be surprised to find that your ex will allege that she acted in self-defence and that the judge is more likely to believe her than you.
   Lawyers call false abuse allegations (especially false sexual abuse allegations) “The silver bullet.”  That is because those allegations never fail to get their man.  Never forget that judges are lawyers, too.
6. “…the only way I see my son is by setting up visits with her brother.”
   Does the restraining order specify “no contact” only with her, or does it include the boy?  If the latter is the case, you are breaking the law with such “visits”.  If she finds out, she will surely have the courts hold that against you.
   The consequence of that will be that you lose your chance of getting even minimal visitation rights (at best one weekend ever two weeks).  You will most likely be ordered to have supervised visitations of once or twice each month, one or two hours each (at a cost of from about $125 to $200 an hour), during which you will not even be allowed to hug your son.
7. “…how to do the process of getting my name on the birth certificate on my own…”
   For that you must make the arrangements through a lawyer.  The circumstances vary enormously from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.  You may be able to accelerate that through refusing to accept paternity.  She will then have to prove that you are the father.  That may help a bit, but that strategy must be discussed with your lawyer.
8. “…getting regular visits where I can have my own time with him.”
   Be careful that those regular visits won’t take the form of supervised visitations.
   If she is reasonable, she will just let you pick up the boy whenever you are supposed to.  If she does not want that, and if she is a physical danger to you, you can make arrangements to have her drop off the boy at a relative’s or trusted friend’s place. Still, that, too, requires her to be reasonable.
   The best plans for such child exchanges or any other visitation arrangements are not worth anything if she doesn’t want to play along.  If she doesn’t play along, there is no recourse for you but to take her to court, time and again.
   Much of that can be avoided if the child-exchange or visitation procedures are spelled out in the court order, but even then she will be able to ignore that with impunity.  It is extremely unlikely that she will be punished for violating the provisions of the court order for visitation, with one exception.  The court order for visitation must contain an order to the local police to assist you in getting your visitation rights enforced if that is necessary.  The police are likely to do nothing for you, unless the visitation orders specifically instruct them to do so if necessary.

There is one more thing I must mention.  You must without delay file an injunction against her that will order her not to move out of the state or province you are located in.  Such injunctions are usually only temporary and should be renewed until you have a court order in hand that spells out to her that she is not permitted to move away.  I know a few North American fathers whose children were abducted to Europe and even to Australia.  The advantage of having such an injunction, or to have a paragraph in the child custody and visitation order that specifies that she cannot move away is that if she does so, she can be charged with kidnapping and you can have the child returned to you.

The trouble with all of the advice I gave you is that if you use any of it, you are bound to make her very angry.  The worst enemy is an angry one.  However, she declared her war against you, and you need to defend yourself, unless you change your name, get false papers and move to another country that does not have a reciprocal agreement with yours to deport you if you are sought for child support obligations.

I strongly suggest that you learn how to navigate the website of Fathers for Life.  The home page contains some instructions on that: How to navigate that website.

Whatever thoughts come to your mind that you wish to find more information on in connection with your  paternal rights or relationship with your ex, chances are good that you will find something on it at Fathers for Life.

I hope that all will work out well for you,

Walter Schneider

Posted in Divorce, Paternal Rights, Civil Rights, Men's Issues, Child-Custody Awards, Women's Violence, The New World Order, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

8 years in prison for plot to steal baby (and for kidnapping)

August 28, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

Missouri woman gets 8 years in prison for plot to steal baby

Yahoo News
Wed Aug 27, 2:53 PM

By The Associated Press

INDEPENDENCE, Mo. - A 20-year-old woman who kidnapped a pregnant teenager she met online in a foiled plot steal her unborn baby has been sentenced to eight years in prison.

Lauren Gash, of Odessa, pleaded guilty last month to kidnapping, assault and felonious restraint in the July 2007 attack on Amanda Howard, then 18, inside a Blue Springs motel room. Gash was sentenced Tuesday to eight years each on the first two counts and seven years on the third. The sentences will run concurrently….(Full Story)

Posted in Child Abduction, Women's Violence, Paternity Fraud | Print | No Comments »

The Virtual Child

August 5, 2008 by Walter Schneider.

The last article identified here states that “Viola Trevino’s plea bargain begins the final chapter of a case that made national headlines.”  That statement is most likely not true, because Shelly and Steve Barreras have not yet and most likely never will be reimbursed for the $20,000 in child support they paid for a child that never was. Yet, that is not on account of inability to pay by the major culprit in the case of one of the worst cases of known paternity fraud ever aided and abetted by a criminal, in this case the State of New Mexico.

The information on this page was copied from the website of Fathers for Life, from the web page that contains advice to men.

…The lesson to be learned from these stories is that if you are in Court to dispute child support obligations or custody issues, first of all make sure that the children are yours; and ideally make sure of that long before the case winds up in court.  Do it right after the birth of the child.  Still, that won’t help much in a case like the following one.

Woman created a “virtual child”, a child that never existed in reality but did exist on forged documents, still, the alleged father had to pay

…first wife Viola Trevino gave new meaning to Paternity Fraud when she created a “virtual daughter” based on a DNA sample from her ex-husband’s adult daughter. With the help of accomplices, she created a Child that Never Existed but that came complete with a Birth Certificate, a Social Security Card, a Medicare Card, and a judicial claim for child support that reached the sum of $20,000.

MAKING A DIFFERENCE - ONE BILLBOARD AT A TIME
By Gordon E. Finley, Ph.D.
November 16, 2006
NewsWithViews.com
Full Story

See also an earlier related story:

Agency culpable in child-support scam

by Wendy McElroy, Dec. !7, 2004

Last week, Viola Trevino carried her 5-year-old “daughter” into an Albuquerque (search) court to satisfy a judge’s demand to produce the child.

Complications arose.

One: Trevino had kidnapped the child moments before to pass off as her daughter.

Two: the “real” daughter never existed.

Three: the “father” and ex-husband Steve Barreras had paid $20,000 in child support.

Four: the system finally noticed Trevino was lying. (Full Story at foxnew.com)

Update 2008 08 01:

KOAT.com

Woman Accused Of Creating Fake Child Makes Plea Deal

Viola Trevino Enters Pleas For 13 Of 24 Felony Counts

August 1, 2008

The Albuquerque woman accused of creating a fictitious child to obtain government benefits and child support appeared in court Friday.

Viola Trevino’s plea bargain begins the final chapter of a case that made national headlines.

Trevino is accused of faking the existence of a child, then bilking the government out of thousands in benefits and her former husband out of tens of thousands in child support….

The plot included fictitious DNA tests and even a baby taken off the street for an appearance in family court….(Full Story)

Note: It will be interesting to see whether Steve Barreras and his wife Shelly will be getting the $20,000 back (with interest, of course) from the State of New Mexico that the State extorted from them for a child that Steve and Shelly [and the State of New Mexico] knew right from the start he could not have fathered.  Steve had undergone a vasectomy before he could possibly have fathered the child he was supposed to have fathered. — WHS

Posted in Child Abduction, Women's Violence, Paternity Fraud | Print | 2 Comments »