Statutory rape victim ordered to pay 15K in retro child support

[Ashley V]

A Phoenix man who had sex with a 20-year-old woman at the age of 14 now owes thousands of dollars in back child support for a child he never knew existed.

Nick Olivas became a father in 2006 — a fact he didn’t learn until two years ago when the state served him with papers demanding child support.

“It was a shock,” he told The Arizona Republic. “I was living my life and enjoying being young. To find out you have a 6-year-old? It’s unexplainable. It freaked me out.”

Mr. Olivas said he panicked and never responded to the papers demanding he take a paternity test. The state eventually tracked him down and seized money from his bank account and is now garnisheeing his wages, The Republic reported.

The father owes at least $15,000 plus interest in back child support and medical bills going back to the child’s birth, the newspaper said.

Mr. Olivas says he is a victim of statutory rape and was taken advantage of at age 14 by a 20-year-old woman. State law says a child younger than 15 cannot consent with an adult under any circumstance. Mr. Olivas said he never pressed charges against the woman.

The Department of Economic Security doesn’t exempt such situations, unless the parent seeking child support has been found guilty of sexual assault. The rule’s purpose is to ensure that the child is cared for, officials told The Republic.

“We don’t see those cases very often, and we’re really glad for that,” said attorney Janet Sell, chief counsel with the Attorney General’s Office’s Child and Family Protection Division, The Republic reported.

Mel Feit, director of the New York-based advocacy group the National Center for Men, pointed out how “ridiculous” it would be if the sexes were reversed.

“The idea that a woman would have to send money to a man who raped her is absolutely off-the-charts ridiculous,” he told the paper. “It wouldn’t be tolerated, and it shouldn’t be tolerated.”

Mr. Olivas said he agreed with paying some child support, but objects to fees incurred before he knew the child existed.

He also is trying to see his daughter, The Republic reported.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/sep/2/statutory-rape-victim-forced-pay-child-support/

 

[onthebottom]

Family courts are crazy anti-male, it's not even remotely balanced.

That said, child support is not about the mother or father, it's about the kid.

 

[Babypowder]

didnt press charges. dont give a fuck.

 

[mandrill]

The problem I have with it is that a teenager has no ability to pay child support and any support order should be based on ability to pay. And of course, the young fellow should have got notice of the proceeding.

I am curious as to whether the less shockingly newsworthy parts of the story have been left out of the article. For instance, was there service of court papers on him that set a "proof of inability to pay" hearing date that the lad simply pretends he never received or simply ignored?? If he never bother attending a hearing to prove he could not pay, then there may be an AZ state law that imputes income at minimum wage. Multiply that times 6 years and you get $15,000.00.

 

[GPIDEAL]

The problem I have with it is that a teenager has no ability to pay child support and any support order should be based on ability to pay. And of course, the young fellow should have got notice of the proceeding.

I am curious as to whether the less shockingly newsworthy parts of the story have been left out of the article. For instance, was there service of court papers on him that set a "proof of inability to pay" hearing date that the lad simply pretends he never received or simply ignored?? If he never bother attending a hearing to prove he could not pay, then there may be an AZ state law that imputes income at minimum wage. Multiply that times 6 years and you get $15,000.00.

You mean his share of support for 6 years based on minimum wage income?

 

[Viggo Rasmussen]

The state already judged he had sex with the woman, therefore he shouldn't have to prove rape since he was underage.
The state should pay his responsibilities to the child, and his legal fees.

 

[Ashley V]

The things you guys are bringing up I've wondered too after reading this story. The 15k backpayment is based on what? Does it go back the full 6 years of the childs life when part of that the Dad was in high school and not earning a living? Was the mother on welfare at any time during the 6 years and if so should she not pay the state back or partly back if the 15K time period overlaps? Why wasn't the Dad informed about this child until 6 years after birth?

 

[rld]

The state already judged he had sex with the woman, therefore he shouldn't have to prove rape since he was underage.
The state should pay his responsibilities to the child, and his legal fees.

Why should the state pay the tab?

 

[mandrill]

You mean his share of support for 6 years based on minimum wage income?

Yes. Most jurisdictions have a government authored chart which correlates support figures to income level and # of kids fathered, or else there is a mathematical formula of some sort.

 

[mandrill]

The things you guys are bringing up I've wondered too after reading this story. The 15k backpayment is based on what? Does it go back the full 6 years of the childs life when part of that the Dad was in high school and not earning a living? Was the mother on welfare at any time during the 6 years and if so should she not pay the state back or partly back if the 15K time period overlaps? Why wasn't the Dad informed about this child until 6 years after birth?

He got served when he turned 18. And it goes back to the child's birth. If Mom was on Welfare, she would owe the state the proportion of support collected from Dad attributable to the time she was on assistance.

I can only assume that AZ state law automatically backdates support to the child's birth and sets a minimum "1 size fits all" figure unless Dad appears at the hearing date and adduces evidence to show cause why the default court order should not be made against him.

 

[mandrill]

Why should the state pay the tab?

^^^^^ Indeed. The state didn't fuck the mother. The teenaged father did. Sounds like he had a pretty good time too and then got hit with a little surprise.

 

[Ashley V]

I wonder if he's considering charging this statutory rapist now? There's obvious dna proof to convict. According to the story AZ State law would exempt her from being able to seek support once a convicted sex offender.

If the fathers a stand up guy I'd like to that happen and the State of Arazona award him full custody and eventually him sue her for back support.

I just can't wrap my head around a sex offender seeking compensation from the victim.

If she was a decent person she would have first attempted a resolution personally instead of just slapping him with a lawsuit out of the blue. Clearly she's not.

 

[Mikehorn]

I wonder if he's considering charging this statutory rapist now? There's obvious dna proof to convict. According to the story AZ State law would exempt her from being able to seek support once a convicted sex offender.

If the fathers a stand up guy I'd like to that happen and the State of Arazona award him full custody and eventually him sue her for back support.

I seriously doubt a 20 year old guy who's "enjoying being young" would even want full custody of a six year old.

 

[Aardvark154]

Bottom line: he never ratted her out, even though it was Statutory Rape.

She had a child, from the perspective of the State of Arizona, since she was never convicted of Statutory Rape, he owes child support.

I'm not arguing for the logic of it all, but it is the way it is.

Many of us know the famous legal maxim: "The best interest of the child"

 

[Viggo Rasmussen]

Why should the state pay the tab?

Why should he have to pay? It was statutory rape and the state didn't look after his interests by prosecuting the rapist.
I've never heard of a statutory rape victim that had make the charge, it's always the law enforcers who do this.

 

[Siocnarf]

I've never heard of a statutory rape victim that had make the charge, it's always the law enforcers who do this.

This is logical. If he's too young to consent to anything, he's also too young to press charge by himself.

 

[Ashley V]

What I've concluded is this. In certain instances of rape the victim must be held accountabe for their actions.

 

[Viggo Rasmussen]

What I've concluded is this. In certain instances of rape the victim must be held accountabe for their actions.

It depends on what he was wearing?

 

[Ashley V]

It depends on what he was wearing?

Sharia law states a 14 year old female who has sex with a 20 year old male shall be forced to marry. Man should support.

Western law states a 14 year old male who has sex with a 20 year old female shall be forced to pay child support. Man should support.

 

[Siocnarf]

You can't hold females accountable for their actions.

Only when they are trying to sell sex next to a school or playground. That's the only time according to MacKay when they make a conscious and free decision.