6-year-old twins weren’t his: should “dad” still pay child support?
Filed under: Divorce
There had always been rumors, but Dylan Davis chose to believe his wife when she told him that the couple's children were his. After the two divorced, Davis took a DNA test that proved he wasn't the father, but he was still required to pay $1,045 a month in child support.
That's because, currently, the law in Colorado requires men to to pay child support for children older than 5, even if they can prove they are not the biological father.
At first, this seems like obvious injustice, but the issue is more complicated. Especially in Davis' case, he'd lived with the children, who assumed he was their father, for 6 years. Though he still pays support (reduced to $663 because a change in employment status), he now has no contact with his children. Whether or not there is a biological connection, his sudden, complete absence from these children's lives must be hard on them. In addition, it's important that the children receive adequate support -- for obvious reasons.
But, regardless of who raised the children, shouldn't the responsibility for support fall on the biological father? Where's the guy the wife was having an affair with? Why isn't anyone chasing him down for money?
Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments