We have been having a lively conversation about child support and paternity. A comment here made me want to write a complete post as a story and possible warning from my own past:
The one thing that I have always been poor at, is in romantic relationships with women. I did have a girlfriend once who told me that it was because I am a professional rescuer in every sense of the word, and she told me that because I feel the need to rescue everyone, some women will take advantage of that. I’m not sure if she is right, but a string of failed relationships does tell a compelling story.
One of those relationships was as big of a mess as you could ever imagine. This one was the one and only time that I dated a woman who had children. She had two of them, and about 3 months after we began dating, I let her move in with me because she and her two kids had nowhere else to go. I helped her out in a lot of ways. I let her use my second car, I provided her with a cell phone on my account, and treated her children properly. A few months later, we broke up, but she kept my car and my cell phone. Then she sued me for child support.
So it turns out that we had dated for a year and a couple of days before breaking up, and there is a law that says if a man acts like a father to children that aren’t his for a year or more, but that man is the only father figure these children know, the court can consider what is in the best interests of the children and can compel him to visit, spend time with, and pay child support for the children. The theory is called parentage by estoppel. Under the doctrine of parentage by estoppel, a court can order a non-biological man to pay child support if:
- He knew he was not the biological father.
- He held himself out or acted as if her were the child’s father
- The child relied on that representation, forming a parental bond and treating him as a father.
This is applied in narrow circumstances, often in stepparent or long-term partner situations. A year or more of acting as the only father figure can support such a finding. Once established as a legal or equitable parent, support obligations can follow even after separation. So that’s what she tried to do.
In my case, she told the court I was abusing her, so she wanted child support and also a domestic violence injunction. That way, I wouldn’t get other parental rights like visitation or joint custody, but I would still have to pay child support. It took me a year to get out of that mess. You can read about much of the case here. I resolved to never again date a woman who had a child.
I made the mistake of telling the story to another girlfriend, and she tried doing the same thing, just minus the child support. It was also a mess. The only good thing with this one is that she was stupid and I only had to deal with it for about a month. I can certainly understand the idea of men not wanting anything to do with women. Thanks to our court system, relationships with women are something that is fraught with danger.
5 Comments
Joe Blow · May 19, 2026 at 12:53 pm
Good Lord, this story encapsulates everything that is wrong with the government in this country…
Just Don't · May 19, 2026 at 4:30 pm
” . . . everything that is wrong with the government in this country”.
Joe – I thing you mean everything that is wrong with women NOT government.
A thought:
How did these lovely empowered flowers who don’t need no man learn they can do this to a man and what the key time thresholds are ?
No-one has ever told me how I can screw over a woman in court after a certain length of time.
This is NOT knowledge we men discuss with other men or teenage boys on the cusp of manhood, yet somehow the women intrinsically know their rights and are not reticent about using them.
I suspect it is the sisterhood or fucking lawyers (or both) who do this.
The solution – EXPOSURE. Dive Medic, Terrance Popp, Paul Elam etc etc etc need to be widely distributed to wise the younger generation of men to “wise them up” to potential consequences.
There’s that new young fella “Clav” who’s a bit of a Chad, has YouTube fame & possibly a bit of cash – stealing girlfriends from their men right in front of the boyfriend live on camera. The “loving” girl in a “long-term” relationship will shamelessly blow “Clav” on camera the next day. It’s got to be a status thing amongst the women. I’m so hot I got “Clav” one time. Alpha widow confirmed. The rest of her life she’ll “deserve” Clav.
We men are willing victims because most of us simply had no idea what the See You Next Tuesdays can and WILL do if they get half a chance. To quote Popp: “She’s different – She LOVES me !” No she’s not. She’s not yours – it’s just your turn.
Fishlaw · May 19, 2026 at 7:38 pm
Hey, at least you’re lucky at cards, right?
J J · May 20, 2026 at 6:53 am
A coworker’s ex-wife took him back to court several years after their divorce seeking an increase in child support. Turned out to be a big mistake because her salary had increased significantly while my coworker had changed jobs and was making less than when the original judgement was made. The judge looked at both of their finances, lowered the amount of child support and made her pay for my coworker’s attorney fees.
A rare case of a judge doing the right thing for a man.
C · May 22, 2026 at 11:37 pm
The only thing that will change it is for several people to remind the black robed tyrants that they are not untouchable. Those people will have to accept a 1:2 score before the afterlife. This change also applies to the Collection Of Pissant(S) and Congress Critters. When that change comes. I don’t know, but it’s going to happen.
Comments are closed.