From: MAILER-DAEMON@dogear.spk.wa.us
Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: mail failed, sending to address owner
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:04:00 GMT
Return-Path: <MAILER-DAEMON>
To: real-acs
Reference: <m0laVO2-0000XDC@dogear.spk.wa.us>

|------------------------- Failed addresses follow: ---------------------|
 "|/usr/lib/news/inews -h -x acs-out -n alt.child-support" ... failed: transport pipe: child returned status EX_1 (1)
|------------------------- Message text follows: ------------------------|
Received: by dogear.spk.wa.us (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.14)
	id <m0laVO2-0000XDC@dogear.spk.wa.us>; Mon, 13 Apr 92 11:04 PDT
Received: by tau-ceti.isc-br.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.14)
	id <m0laV1Z-0003PKC@tau-ceti.isc-br.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 92 10:41 PDT
Received: by relay.tek.com id <AA04843@relay.tek.com>; Mon, 13 Apr 92 10:28:27 -0700
Received: from soul.tv.tek.com by tektronix.TEK.COM (4.1/8.0)
	id AA14786; Mon, 13 Apr 92 10:30:54 PDT
Received: from thd.tv.tek.com by soul.tv.tek.com with SMTP id AA01804
  (5.65c.tv/IDA-1.4.4); Mon, 13 Apr 1992 10:27:55 -0700
Received: by thd.tv.tek.com (4.1/SMI-4.1(tv.tek.com))
	id AA07399; Mon, 13 Apr 92 10:27:53 PDT
Message-Id: <9204131727.AA07399@thd.tv.tek.com>
To: acs@dogear.spk.wa.us, adr@dogear.spk.wa.us
             <m0laIjF-0000U8C@dogear.spk.wa.us> 
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 10:27:52 -0700
From: Bill McFadden <bill@tv.tv.tek.com>


>	The law says that a baby born to a married couple is assumed
>	to be of that marriage.  This, of course, is significant
>	where the wife is suspected of cheating and/or if the
>	realtionship breaks up, and the woman turns up pregnant in
>	the immediate future.  In an in-tact marriage it probably
>	wouldn't reach a public forum.  In a split up, the
>	husband is assumed to be the father.

>	What if the man has had a vasectomy?

This was my situation exactly.  The law (I live in Oregon) says that
the husband is the father unless the father was sterile at the time of
conception.  My attorney told me about cases involving men who had gone
to war and who had not seen their wives for several years having to pay
child support for children conceived during their absence.

My attorney warned me that it would still be difficult to convince the
court that I should not pay, even though I had had a vasectomy several
months before conception.  Apparently it was still up to the judge.  To
maximize my chances, I would have to file for divorce before the child
was born, and assert that it was not mine.  After it was born, I was to
do nothing that could be considered parenting.

The divorce was still waiting to go to court when the baby was born.
Even though I had to let it live in my house and couldn't prevent the
real father from visiting, I had to completely ignore the baby for fear
that I would be accused of "parenting."  This was very difficult.

I lost my year-long battle to get my custody of my son, and I was
ordered to pay over $500 a month in child support, but I did not have
to pay for the baby that wasn't mine.  Fortunately, my ex-wife admitted
who the father really was when my attorney confronted her with the fact
that another man was paying for the baby's medical insurance.  I had
learned about this when the membership card listing the baby's and his
name was accidentally sent to my address.  Oops!!

My ex-wife is now collecting support for four children from three men.
The father of her latest is giving her money voluntarily and so hasn't
been ordered to by a court to pay (yet).  He is already paying child
support for at least three other children from a previous marriage.  My
ex-wife is unemployed and living on her child support payments and
government aid.

--
Bill McFadden    Tektronix, Inc.  P.O. Box 500  MS 58-639  Beaverton, OR  97077
bill@tv.tv.tek.com, ...!tektronix!tv.tv.tek.com!bill      Phone: (503) 627-6920
Xref: sparky alt.child-support:1143 alt.dads-rights:681