Monday, May 16, 2011

Male victims of rape that have to pay child support.

That was somehow interesting, I just wanted to look up an interesting Reddit post, and ended up looking through Wikipedia's interesting database. So what happened? 5 days ago someone posted this on reddit, to highlight the text copied by the top comment:
In the U.S., courts across the country including the California Court of Appeal have held that male victims of rape are liable for child support for any children resulting from the crime.
So far so good, however if you look at the Wikipedia article right now you will find a different text:
In at least one case, the California Court of Appeal held that the male victim of statutory rape can be liable for child support.
Well, there is certainly a difference, looking at when this was changed make it suspicious. 4 days ago by an anonymous Ip-address. Chances are somebody looked at the source found on Reddit, didn't like what he/she was reading and switched it. It is kind of odd, because if you look at the linked article, this is a direct citiation:
 In holding Nathaniel J., a statutory rape victim, financially liable for child support, the California Court of Appeal joined other courts across the country that have held that a male victim of statutory rape can be forced to pay child support for a child resulting from his....
I am not sure if I am on to something here, but it is likely that some people watch MR communities closely and try to fight against us. Anyhow in searching for the full article, I  found another one that is worth reading. A CRITIQUE OF THE STRICT LIABILITY STANDARD FOR DETERMINING CHILD SUPPORT IN CASES OF MALE VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND STATUTORY RAPE - ELLEN 

To cite one of the courts:
any wrongful conduct on the part of the mother should not alter the father’s duty to provide support for the child

1 comment:

  1. I don't see a difference...

    I also think that it's absolutely disgusting.