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
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 28, 2022 at 18:05 | comment | added | Tiercelet | @Esther right, in Canadian jurisdiction. The same logic holds in the US (and I believe the US also has case law establishing that exposing someone to possible pregnancy under false pretenses does constitute sexual assault, like in the Canadian case cited above & in contrast to the UK case cited below). | |
| Apr 28, 2022 at 17:48 | comment | added | Esther | @Tiercelet that's exactly what the answer above this states | |
| Apr 28, 2022 at 16:21 | comment | added | Tiercelet | @fraxinus "giving birth to a child cannot be considered damage"--after the child is born, perhaps; but note that pregnancy is itself a health risk, which is why insurance recognized by the US Affordable Care Act is required to cover birth control for people who can become pregnant (healthcare.gov/coverage/birth-control-benefits). (Insurance is not required to cover birth control used by people who can impregnate others, since causing a pregnancy does not create health risks.) | |
| Apr 28, 2022 at 1:43 | comment | added | Greendrake | @fraxinus Well, Bob claims precisely that: the child is a damage to him because he has to pay their support. He is not a good father (which is another reason why he didn't want to become one in the first place) and does not want to see the child, so not worried about being banned from it. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 14:10 | comment | added | fraxinus | You still cannot claim that your own child is a damage for you. Any attempt in this direction will probably get you banned from seeing your child. This is no different from getting married, having a child or maybe more than one and then deciding to divorce because your wife deceived you to marry her with cosmetics and false promises. Well, it is different in regard to owing support to your ex-wife as well. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 13:13 | comment | added | Greendrake | @fraxinus The premise of the question is that that has been proved. What next? | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 12:59 | comment | added | fraxinus | Well, proving that a conception happened because of deceiving and not because of a honest failure of the preventive measures is a task of its own right. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 12:50 | comment | added | Greendrake | @fraxinus I'd accept that as an answer if it was decided by a judge. Cite a case and I'll put the green tick. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 12:48 | comment | added | fraxinus | Giving birth to a child cannot be considered damage at any rate in regard to anyone - at least, not in 2022, not in more or less civilized parts of the world. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 12:46 | comment | added | Greendrake | @TigerGuy Bob was assured by Alice that contraception was in place, so the fact that sex was unprotected [from impregnation] was unbeknown to him. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 12:41 | comment | added | Trish | What case was this? | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 12:39 | comment | added | Tiger Guy | @Greendrake, the direct cause is unprotected sex. We all know how babies are made. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 12:31 | comment | added | Greendrake | That is hard to digest. The expenses were directly caused by deceitful conduct, knowing that Bob did not want those expenses. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 12:26 | comment | added | fraxinus | Because there is no damage. Expenses are not necessarily a damage. | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 12:06 | comment | added | Greendrake | So, is an expense-related case ruled out? Why? | |
| Apr 27, 2022 at 11:50 | history | answered | fraxinus | CC BY-SA 4.0 |