Timeline for Does Bob have a case if he ends up paying child support due to Alice's deceit?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28, 2022 at 16:32 | comment | added | kaya3 | A relevant case from Kansas is Hermesmann v. Seyer. The plaintiff was a woman who conceived a child by statutory rape of a minor; the court decided that the minor did have to pay child support. | |
| Apr 28, 2022 at 13:14 | comment | added | MonkeyZeus | en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperm_theft#Cases seems like a good read. | |
| Apr 28, 2022 at 9:10 | comment | added | Gregory Currie | It appears a few answers here talk about criminal aspects, but I think the question is really asking if Bob can sue Alice for damages due to the tort of deceit. Alice lied with malice to induce Bob to act in a manner that has caused him injury. You could probably throw in fraud in there if you could prove a benefit for Alice. | |
| Apr 28, 2022 at 1:57 | comment | added | Greendrake | @R..GitHubSTOPHELPINGICE That sounds like a different question. Feel free to ask (if there are no duplicates already). | |
| Apr 28, 2022 at 0:08 | comment | added | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | This question would be a lot more interesting formulated where the biological parents had never had any romantic or sexual relationship. For instance, if Alice were Bob's girlfriend's housemate or even a random person who broke into Bob's house. Where it's not deceipt but outright theft of genetic material. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 23:33 | comment | added | Greendrake | @KevinMcKenzie For simplicity and to avoid being side-tracked, we can assume Alice told Bob she had hysterectomy done. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 23:19 | vote | accept | Greendrake | ||
| Apr 27, 2022 at 21:33 | comment | added | Kevin McKenzie | I'm not sure if it's relevant to the question, but a thing to keep in mind is short of hysterectomy, there is no 100% safe method of having sex. So if you were to pick something Alice was going to lie about to Bob, that would probably be a better thing than an IUD or the like. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 21:28 | comment | added | Michael Borgwardt | @SJuan After some research, as far as I can tell the "semen theft" claim was probably a tabloid invention. The case was decided by a civil court in the UK, and the proceedings are not public. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 16:31 | comment | added | SJuan76 | A lot of years ago Boris Becker faced a paternity demand and his lawyers claimed that there had been no copulation but that the woman took the sperm from her mouth and used it to artificial insemination. I know that Boris Becker was found to be the father and forced to pay support, but I do not know how that particular claim was received (if it was dismissed as false or unsupported, or if it was that found that even if that was what happened, Becker had to pay child support). | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 16:30 | answer | added | David Mulder | timeline score: 7 | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 16:05 | answer | added | David Mulder | timeline score: 17 | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 15:14 | history | became hot network question | |||
| Apr 27, 2022 at 13:04 | comment | added | jarnbjo | At least in some European countries, Bob may have a case, but any approach will depend greatly on details in the relevant jurisdiction. In Germany, the recognized legal father (with obligations) and the biological father is not necessarily the same person. In Sweden, claiming to use contraception but not doing so is itself an offense (one of the accusations against Julian Assange). In Austria, there is an older ruling from the supreme court in a similar case, where the father was held responsible for child support as fathering a child is an inevitable and accepted risk when having intercourse. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 11:50 | answer | added | fraxinus | timeline score: 7 | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 9:36 | history | edited | Greendrake | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 16 characters in body
|
| Apr 27, 2022 at 9:31 | history | edited | Greendrake | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 209 characters in body
|
| Apr 27, 2022 at 7:47 | comment | added | Greendrake | @Hilmar That's understood. Bob does not contest having to pay the child support and pays it diligently. Yet the possible case is against the mother only, with payouts possibly delayed until the child has grown up. Clearly, Alice has deceived Bob, and he has incurred expenses he explicitly was aiming to avoid. Why won't Alice be eventually liable? | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 7:38 | comment | added | Hilmar | That needs a country and state tag. But in most places would be on the hook. I believe that child support is the right of the child, not the mother, so the mother cannot waive it and whatever the mother does (or has done) cannot affect a right of the child. Here is an illustrative example: edition.cnn.com/2014/01/23/justice/kansas-sperm-donation/… | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 7:14 | history | asked | Greendrake | CC BY-SA 4.0 |