Male Rape Victim forced to pay Child Support to Rapist.

[Mihalik]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/09/0...athered-at-14/

Long story short. 20 year old woman has sex with a 14 year old boy. (Which is in Arizona classed as Statutory Rape). 6 years later, the woman sues for Child Support, and wins, during this time he was unaware that he had a child.

Funny enough, he is willing to pay, and is willing to take part in the kids life. His problem is that they also demand backpay for the past 6 years, which he is having a hard time meeting.

And this is not the first time this happens.

#ThisiswhyIneedMensRights

[GodlyBob]

For some reason, I imagine this happens less often than false rape accusations(which are rare). I mean, they both happen, sure, but is it really something we need an advocacy group for?

[Forgettable]

If you could please direct me to anyone who supported and was involved in the decision making process for this trial so I can slap them across the face, that would be wonderful.

[Stonecloak]

Kind of does seem like men are getting the extreme short end of the stick in certain situations. Maybe it is time.

[Hooked]

Oh that's awful news.

[PizzaSHARK]

#ThisiswhyIneedMensRights

Oh, just go back to redpill and MRA where you belong.

[Gheld]

Was it actual rape rape? Because 14-20 almost seems like it might fall under romeo and juliet laws. So I think the question of whether or not he consented is relevant here.

EDIT: Also aren't prior living conditions etc considered in child support calculations? What level of socio-economic situation could a 14 year old possibly provide?

[Mihalik]

Oh, just go back to redpill and MRA where you belong.

I have a vague idea what redpill supposed to be, tho I don't subscribe to that non-sense. Neither do I think "men are oppressed" or whatnot. But I know for a fact that men get the short end of the stick when it comes to parental rights, marriage laws, social services and criminal law. I believe those issues need to be addressed. Those issues are gender specific.

- - - Updated - - -

Was it actual rape rape? Because 14-20 almost seems like it might fall under romeo and juliet laws. So I think the question of whether or not he consented is relevant here.

It doesn't fall under Romeo and Juliet Laws, and consent is irrelevant because under US law you can't consent at the age of 14.

[Hooked]

I'm all for child support, but not when the parent was a minor.

A ton of minors are parents. It is an epidemic.

[Mihalik]

EDIT: Also aren't prior living conditions etc considered in child support calculations? What level of socio-economic situation could a 14 year old possibly provide?

That's a good question. To be honest I don't know. The Court adjudicated $380/month. But that also includes the past 6 years, plus a 10% interest. Which is somewhere around 15k.

[PizzaSHARK]

A ton of minors are parents. It is an epidemic.

Abstinence-only education doin its job.

[Spike]

People need to stop focusing on the "Statutory Rape" part of this because as the law does not apply to these instances as they are not trying to convict anyone of that in these hearings, they are determining if the "parent" aka the child is the father and if they are then they need to be able to support the child that they conceived. so people focusing on the "Statutory Rape" part of these are always going to be pissed or angry cause the outcome will always be the same, so again dont focus on that but focus on what the rule of law is saying in the "child support" laws that the states have enacted.

[Themius]

Well this is ridiculous...i hope he fights it...but from the sounds of it, he won't.

[Themius]

People need to stop focusing on the "Statutory Rape" part of this because as the law does not apply to these instances as they are not trying to convict anyone of that in these hearings, they are determining if the "parent" aka the child is the father and if they are then they need to be able to support the child that they conceived. so people focusing on the "Statutory Rape" part of these are always going to be pissed or angry cause the outcome will always be the same, so again dont focus on that but focus on what the rule of law is saying in the "child support" laws that the states have enacted.

The rape shouldn't matter in this case? As said in the article you can't say "children can't consent and therefore this was rape and you're not responsible for the action." and then turn around and sue them and say they're responsible for a child born from statutory rape.

There is a case where a woman divorced her husband because he raped her and she was forced to pay alimony. Should we ignore the rape portion of her case and say "well they divorced and she makes more than him so..."

[Mihalik]

People need to stop focusing on the "Statutory Rape" part of this because as the law does not apply to these instances as they are not trying to convict anyone of that in these hearings, they are determining if the "parent" aka the child is the father and if they are then they need to be able to support the child that they conceived. so people focusing on the "Statutory Rape" part of these are always going to be pissed or angry cause the outcome will always be the same, so again dont focus on that but focus on what the rule of law is saying in the "child support" laws that the states have enacted.

So you also subscribe to the principle that female rape victims should be forced not to abort and should be forced not to give up the kids for adoption if born?

[Spike]

no I am saying that when a judge hears this case they would throw out anything to do with the "rape" it would be based on the facts of the case that relate to the rule of the law so you can complain and say its not fair but even if they fight it they wont win because the state or plaintiffs lawyer would never let the other side allow those materials in the proceedings

[Hooked]

Abstinence-only education doin its job.

No its the guaranteed welfare that is causing it. Government daddy is causing it I think.

[Deleted]

what's the issue here? the kid seemed happy enough to stick his penis into a hot piece of ass and made a baby (that's how it works, right?) and is now content to make childcare payments.

doesn't seem to be a victim here.

[Deleted]

This is one of the cases where law was a sledgehammer where it should have been a scalpel.

[Zantos]

Was it actual rape rape? Because 14-20 almost seems like it might fall under romeo and juliet laws.

I am wandering this myself. Was it Actual rape? As in, one or the other wasn't consenting? Seriously, at anyone with common sense and logic knows darn good and well that a 14 year old knows plenty well what sex is. I do not agree with him having to pay back pay though. Especially since he was not informed about his child at all.

I wouldn't go so far as to say "rape victim" when they are 14. 13 is when they are pushing it big time. The only crime here is forcing someone to pay back pay that was not given the information or privilege of knowing they had a child. Forcing them to pay now is pushing it. Its only acceptable because he Does want to be apart of his childs life.