Hot on HuffPost Parents:
Linda Bloom LCSW and Charlie Bloom MSW: Overwhelmed Parents: A…
Allison Tate: What I Would Like to Tell My Son's 5th Grade Teacher Now
Paternity Suit Sparks Debate About Rights of Fathers
Filed under: Just For Dads, In The News
When Mark Webb found out that his daughter wasn't actually his -- biologically, that is -- he didn't just get mad. He decided to get even and sue for paternity fraud. Desperate situations call for desperate measures, and in this case, desperate totals £100,000 (about $200,000) in damages. That doesn't account for the human damage, mostly for Elspeth Webb, now 22.
The couple had a difficult marriage, including affairs on both their parts. It's something they got past until, that is, his then-wife Lydia admitted that an old flame was the biological father of Elspeth. "She said, 'I've got something I need to tell you,'" Webb told the Daily Mail of that life-altering conversation. "'You're not the father of Elspeth.'"
For all the obvious reasons, Webb, 47, left home in 2003. "I had no idea that Elspeth might not be mine," said Webb. "I was stunned. People say my pride's been hurt, but it's beyond pride. I suppose my dignity has been damaged more than anything else."
Webb was forced to pay child support for the couple's two younger daughters, while Elspeth's biological dad agreed to pay her support at approximately $2,500 a month. "What I thought was, I've brought up three children and it now transpires I wasn't the father of one of them," said Webb. "I've got to pay for these two, so should [the biological dad] now have to repay the money I've spent bringing up his child?" Let's see what all the players think about that question.
Webb says yes. His ex-wife said no. The biological dad said no. And now, the courts said no, refusing him permission to appeal against the ruling.
Elspeth is no longer speaking to him. Webb said, "I loved Elspeth and I still do," and claimed that this isn't about the money. It's about all of the other men who could be victims of paternity fraud. He's like Batman for paternity.
Anytime someone says that they are fighting the good fight for "everyone else who is in my situation," I get very suspicious. He isn't Karen Silkwood or an Enron whistle-blower. This is a husband and father who is understandably very pissed off that wifey was being buggered by another bloke. Alright. But Webb seems to have decided that his "crusade" for the rights of fathers is more important than his relationship with his children, biological or not. And that can't be right.
What do you think? Is Mark Webb right to try to recoup his money and take his failed court case to an even higher authority -- the court of public opinion? Is he really being denied his rights?
TheTalkies:RelatedVideos
-
Jesus Henry Christ- Trailer No. 1
Henry James Herman, a petri dish child who writes rabble-rousing manifestos on the nature of truth... at age 10. This boy-genius misfit's world turns upside down when-to the dismay of the doting single mother who raised him-he embarks on a search for his biological father.
-
Dan Marino Admits To Fathering Child In Extramarital Affair
NFL Hall of Fame quarterback and current CBS analyst Dan Marino just admitted he knocked up a CBS Sports employee and paid her millions to keep it secret.
-
Joran Van Der Sloot Fathers Child While in Prison
That bad Dutch boy, Joran van der Sloot, you know, the guy you never take walks with along a rocky beach, or go alone to his hotel room, is back in the news.
-
Father Leaves Child In Truck While At Strip Club
A father is facing charges after he allegedly left his 2-year-old daughter in a truck while he went inside a strip club and got drunk.
24-year-old Santos Barillas, a Canoga Park resident, was charged with child endangerment among other charges.
911 dispatchers got a call just after midnight that the toddler was locked in the truck outside the 7557 Club on Woodley Avenue.
Officers arrived at the location to find the man asleep with the child in the back seat of the Toyota pickup.
SitesWeLove
- Site Map
- |
- Staff
- |
- Terms of Service
- |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Trademarks
- |
- Advertise With Us
- |
- About Our Ads
- |
- AOL Downloads
- |
- Contact Us
- |
© Copyright 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Aol Family
ReaderComments (Page 1 of 1)
2-02-2009 @ 2:57PM
Jenni said...I think that if he can prove that the biological father knew that there was a possibility of him being the father, that he should be able to sue for the money he spent raising this other man's child.
He's right, it's not about the money; but on some level it is. If this other man knew that he could possibly be the father and shrugged off his duties and if the mother knew as well (which it is apparent she did) then they should be held accountable for the financial end of things.
I think it's a shame that he has to do this in a way that makes the child get caught in the middle and feel like it is all about the money; but at some point people need to start to be held accountable to the frauds and lies they present.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 3:56PM
Karen said...I think if you have an affair and get pregnant during that time frame that you are obligated to reveal to your spouse that they may not be the father. If not, that is fraud. Then the father has teh right to request paternity testing. If he refuses paternity test he is automatically the father. If he is or is not the father than he can decide whether he wants to continue in the marriage. If he does not continue in the marriage than he should not have to pay child support for that child. If he does stay in the marriage, then it puts the matter to rest permanently. He is legally the father and responsible for the child.
If the woman commits fraud, then she should have to pay back the payments with interest but the payments do not begin until the child turns 18 or 22 (if college bound). Interest payments acrue. That way, the child isn't punished. Collect money from the bio day to keep the money coming in, and pay back the dad that paid AFTER the child leaves the house.
I definately think it is ok to separate your love for your child, and your desire to be compensated for having fraud committed against you. Granted, it is going to be difficult for the child to understand, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't go after the money.
You can't have it both ways. If you want to aggressively pursue those that owe child support, you have to aggressively protect them as well.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 5:50PM
Uly said...I continue to think as I always have - this is a shitty thing to do to a kid.
Once you take responsibility for a child, you don't back out. No, not even if it's "not your kid".
Maybe if he'd never been involved in Elspeth's life other than the checks, I'd say differently, but how appalling is it that he can claim "I've always loved her" while simultaneously saying "Well, her mom fucked another dude, so she's not REALLY my kid, I shouldn't've had to take care of her"?
You can't say that's right.
You think you're not the father of the kid? Well, decide NOW if you're going to be part of the kid's life or not. And if you decide to be a dad - even if it's not biologically your child - then you don't get to back out of that decision. Paternity tests after infancy are a crying shame, that's what they are.
As for the bio-dad, sure, what he did (sleeping with a married woman) was pretty shitty. But did he know he had a kid? Sounds like her mom never told him. He didn't get to raise this child, why should he have to pay the cash? He never had a chance to be her dad. (Sure, it's great if he steps up to the plate and offers, but seriously.)
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 6:55PM
Karen said...Right on, Uly. And the story says they *both* were unfaithful, so there is no moral high ground for him to claim. Just because he can't get knocked up does not make him more hurt than she was. I'm also disgusted that he thinks that the baby he saw into this world and raised all her life is suddenly no longer his responsibility because it wasn't his sperm. That poor kid. First they name her "Elspeth," and now this. I know my stepfather considers us his kids, and he treats us as such; he even walked me down the aisle. When he said things like "I told her not to worry and said, “I’m still your dad. It’s not going to change anything from my point of view.” ’ [quote from article]," he meant it. That's why I call him every week and only recently reconciled with my bio-dad.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 10:50PM
Hoju said...Mark is totally in the right and obviously his ex should have informed him regardless of who was or wasn't faithful. While it is a pity that the situation couldn't be sorted in a way that was compassionate to Elspeth, the fact remains that Elspeth is not Mark's child.
I can see that the "bio-dad" doesn't really have a case to answer - if he didn't know - it comes down to the mother ... a pretty devious thing to have done if she knew and even if she was uncertain.
Rather than leave Mark holding the (not-his-)baby so to speak, there should probably be a two or three way split of the cost involved in raising Elspeth ... that would be at least part-way fairer.
Reply
2-02-2009 @ 11:12PM
Uly said...Of course she's really his kid. He *raised* her. He claims to love her as a daughter. You can't pick and choose parenting like that - "Oh, I'll take her to the zoo and celebrate birthdays for ten years, but I won't pay any money if she's not a product of my holy, holy sperm".
You take the responsibility of being a father, then you don't look back. To do otherwise is petty and childish - and that's the nicest I can say about it.
2-02-2009 @ 11:26PM
Hoju said...Uly, that's just a case of mixing up the legal and moral issues.
She might be his kid in a "parenting sense" but that doesn't get by the issue that she isn't biologically speaking. That may be trivial to some but really isn't.
Mark has been defrauded in one sense but of course in another he has been enriched with a non-biological-daughter. The biological dad is probably another victim here.
Of course, I agree a solution that would have been more compassionate to Elspeth would have been key. At the moment all we have is a cop-out and dumping it all on the innocent non-biological Dad.
2-02-2009 @ 11:00PM
Gigi Sotomayor said...Everyone involved needs to take responsibility for their actions: Wifey for being a whore, the biological father for being a deadbeat, and as far as this man is concerned, I have some advice for him: Maybe the ex-Mrs. should sue YOU for emotional distress for cheating as well, people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 8:26AM
Chrissy said...This type of case isn't new. And while, yes, it does suck for the child, it has happened that there have been guys who ARE faithful to their wives and ebnd up getting the short end of the stick. The law needs to be changed, for those who are unaware that their wives have cheated and are then stuck paying for some random guy's child for 18 years. If people in this situation think this is unfair, then either don't cheat or use better birth control.
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 9:13AM
Cearralyn said...This "dad" is selfish, greedy, and shallow. He SAYS he still loves Elspeth. No, he does not, and he is showing that he NEVER loved her by what he is doing. No wonder she no longer speaks to him! Think of the emotional damage he has done to her. All he can think about is getting paid for what he spent on her. What a nasty, rotten man! His wife should have told him the truth at the beginning, but he wasn't any great shakes as a husband either. This idiot reminds me of the man who is suing his ex because of the kidney he GAVE her to save her life. He is suing because he thinks she had an affair...something his ex AND the other man deny. This "dad" should have sucked it in and said it doesn't matter...Elspeth is my daughter in my heart...and he should have left it at that. Elspeth should sue HIM for the pain he has put her through.
Reply
2-03-2009 @ 3:34PM
acm said..."It’s a very serious, complex, frightening issue. "
Well, that's certainly been men's view of paternity for millenia -- they're scared that there's no womb-level certainty for them. But at some point, it's up to you to fix your own attitude -- I view this child as a gift, that I got to watch and be part of her life -- not a burden that I had to bear in the cost of shoes and cereal. If it's "not personal," then you shouldn't need somebody to pay you for what you did out of "love"...
He's upset that he was betrayed, and I'm sure many would feel likewise. But as a result, the larger principle that he's fighting for is the right to punish women for their frightening capacity for betrayal (since his affairs can never make *him* pregnant), and the only one who's getting punished is his daughter. The grown-ups have to be the grown-ups in situations like this, even if it's painful.
Reply
2-05-2009 @ 9:17AM
Ellen from MindBites.com said...Clearly this man is hurt and because he feels that his wife treated him poorly and was not sympathetic at all to him when she told him the truth. She pulled out this piece of information to use as a weapon against him for something he did to contribute to the failed marriage. This not only deeply hurt his feelings, bruised his ego but also embarrased him and made him feel insignificant. I would say that this type of low blow should never be used in an argument or as a one up because of the obvious backlash that will occur.
I think he is holding on to the "money" angle because he feels that it is the one thing that he can control. I would not read too much into him looking for repayment. It is not about the money. It is about this man trying to regain a sense of order and control in both is mind as well as ego.
http://www.MindBites.com
Reply
2-16-2009 @ 4:35AM
Dan said...To the women out there who think this man is selfish:
Imagine someone dumped a baby on your doorstep, and because you don't know who did it, you discover that you're legally obligated to spend the next 18 years of your life feeding, clothing, and educating it. Had you known the parents, you could have made an informed decision, but you were stuck. You have no choice in the matter. By virtue of another person's actions, you're locked into parenthood with no alternative.
Since, from a legal standpoint, the child is entitled to financial support from both parents, men who father children without marrying the mother are routinely held responsible for the child's costs. If the "other man" had impregnated a woman in a bar, and she found him later, he would be responsible for the back child support. Why should this be different? One reason: the support has already been paid, and the issue is fraud. The ex-wife should absolutely be financially responsible for the husband's costs. If, however, the other man were found to know about the situation and didn't step up, he should be responsible for half the costs (being a party to the fraud), with the ex-wife paying the other half. If he didn't know, he should be able to sue the ex-wife as well for denying him 22 years of time with his biological daughter (if he were so inclined). Men are responsible for the children they father, but women should also be responsible when they intentionally defraud a man to obtain support for a "fatherless" child. It's theft, no matter who benefits.
To those of you who think it's too late for any of this: how would you feel about every father routinely demanding paternity tests before signing birth certificates?
Reply
4-03-2009 @ 6:23AM
c.b. said...I think both parties are wrong, but the mother is more at fault. If she knew her husband was not the father of the child and they went their seperate ways,she puts child support on him and he pays on a daily basis until that child is a legal adult, i think he should be able to sue his wife or ex-wife for the money because if he gets behind on those payments, she will have his ass in court with the quickness. I call that extortion.
Reply