 |
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports in this article that a man has lost a second court battle to have his child support obligation removed from a child which DNA tests have proven is not his. He argued that the last 10 years he has been paying child support was the result of his being defrauded by the mother of the child, but the judge would not amend the paternity suit. Isn't it great that DNA tests can be used to force men into unwanted paternity while they often mean nothing when absolving men of it? Update: I've fixed the link to the story.
|
|
|
