Paternity Testing and Wisconsin Child Support Laws

15 Dec

💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡

Before you read this post or comment,
please read these critically important posts first.
Click here and here.

💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡
💡

Many people have been asking why Jessica would leave her child with a man who did not want to acknowledge the child as his, assuming that he did in fact deny London as his on the basis of the fact that a paternity test was conducted. This may not be the case at all. As one commenter pointed out, some states require paternity testing to be conducted if the mother received state assistance during her pregnancy so that the state can be reimbursed for half of the expenses incurred. Furthermore, Wisconsin does have certain child support laws that require DNA paternity testing:

Establishing Paternity for Wisconsin Child Support

If your child was born while you were married, then the husband is the legal father of the child. If the child’s parents are not married, paternity will need to be established prior to the court ordering child support. Parents can establish paternity by filing a voluntary paternity acknowledgment form with the state. You can find this form at the hospital where your baby is born and from the local child support agency…

Please keep in mind that we are all engaging in pure speculation as we discuss this case and are speaking our personal opinions with respect to the issues it raises. Why the public loves to convict people without any evidence or hard facts has even the best experts scratching their heads, so I am certainly not qualified to solve a problem of such magnitude; however, that is not going to stop me begging people to exercise a little restraint or stop me trying to provide you with the best information I can find. Isn’t this just commonsense? Or have I just lost my mind?

Digg!

10 Responses to “Paternity Testing and Wisconsin Child Support Laws”

  1. Cecily December 16, 2007 at 11:40 PM #

    Thank you for your updates. I am glad you are keeping an open mind:) As the days pass I am just feeling sad and horrified for everyone involved in the case. I do not take Josh’s side, but I can see the hell he has created for himself…and as the sheriff on the news broadcast from youtube stated, he was distraught and remorseful. It is a shame for everyone of them; sitting there thinking constantly, if they had only done this or that..if they had only known this or that. It just breaks my heart she is gone and no one can turn back time and educate them.
    I thank you again for keeping up with the case and letting people know the truth as it is revealed. I know there must be a logical reason Jessica left the baby with him, but it just seems so odd that she never checked up on London. It seems so odd that parents knowing their son is still so young can turn a way and not wonder if the baby is doing ok. I have to say MOSY younger men and boys don’t really know what to do or how to take care of a baby. BUT, nothing excuses what he did to that little angel.
    I had my first daughter at 17, so I know how hard and frustrating it can be, but thankfully I had my mothers advice to help me through any tough times I had.

  2. kat scratch December 17, 2007 at 4:11 PM #

    This artical posted about the unkempt condition is missing a complete chunk. In that same artical but omitted its states that After pending paternity test THE MOTHER took the child to the fathers and never returned! Now this is not an excuse for what happened to this poor beautiful child. But what mother would do such a thing? she and her family said that THE baby is now his responsibility. If i were in her shoes i cant imagine how i would deal with myself. I hope she can find the strength to carry on.

  3. Faerie♥Kat December 17, 2007 at 6:45 PM #

    Thanks, Cecily; your comment is most welcome. I, too, am thankful that your mom gave you the support you needed. I think a good support network is vital in the cases. Faerie hugz, sweetie.

    Kat

  4. Faerie♥Kat December 17, 2007 at 8:09 PM #

    Hi Kat Scratch

    I like the name.

    First, that Jessica never “returned” is Josh’s version. No one has reported Jessica’s side of the story yet. I’ve heard one unverified account that she did visit. And since no one but Josh was home during the day (he being out of work), if she did call or visit, the rest of the members of the Star Prairie farm house would have been in ignorance unless he told them. The people living in that farm house weren’t on the best of terms, since they made it quite clear that London was Joshua’s complete responsibility and even refused to hold her.

    Second, we don’t know why Jessica left London with Joshua, where she was in the intervening time, or what she was doing, either. How people can be outraged over circumstances they know nothing of yet is beyond me.

    I’ll bet myself a million dollars she wasn’t, but what if she was in a car accident and in a coma all that while? All the people that have been condemning her out of hand would feel pretty foolish if a “truth” like that came out. (I doubt one will, but you never know.)

    London died a horrible death: Be royally pissed about that.

    Joshua caused her to hit her head against the wall and caused her death: Be royally pissed at him for that.

    WHEN we find out what Jessica did, we can be royally pissed if we need to be. Until then, what is the point of being pissed about a speculation?

    Kat

  5. shannon December 18, 2007 at 3:20 PM #

    Ok, well, “if” she was comatosed & in a car accident, she wouldn’t have been able to drop London off w/ Joshua; let alone visit at any time during those 3 weeks now, would she? That makes No sense if you think it through.
    Oh, but she woke out of her
    “coma” when London ended up hospitalized & was able to get right to her?
    I know you said you doubt that was what happened & wanted to put it out there as a “what if;” but it isn’t possible.
    There are no “what ifs” as far as the car accident/coma scenario.

  6. Faerie♥Kat December 18, 2007 at 3:32 PM #

    Well, you totally missed the whole point of the example. I chose an example that was patently ridiculous. If anyone thinks for a second that the example was plausible, they need to get their heads examined. Since you missed the point, I guess I’ll have to spell it out real simple:

    Until you know what really happened, you are uselessly expending energy being pissed off at a figment of your own imagination.

    Might as well go be pissed off at a cloud on the horizon because you think it looks like a thunderstorm that will head your way some day. If that’s how you want to live your life, feel free. You’ll spend it being miserable, which really isn’t okay with me because your negativity gets spewed all over the rest of us, but I can’t stop you. So have at it. Just don’t have at it here.

    Kat

  7. Rose December 20, 2007 at 12:38 AM #

    so all you people who is blaming this on jessica situation you need to take a moment and look and see whos getting charged for murder and who not

  8. Goog January 7, 2008 at 10:41 AM #

    http://www.wisconsinfathers.org/paternity.htm

    This website states that a father CAN claim that he is that father. If Josh had said that Londond was his, there would not have been a DNA test. Now, it does say “generally” the court will consider him the father if he signs – it does NOT say every single time, I am acknowledging that. However, it looks like Josh was denying his child. ALso, I have never said that Jessica was responsible for London’s murder, but she IS responsible for leaving a tiny child in the hands of someone who didn’t want her. That is her fault.

  9. Faerie♥Kat January 7, 2008 at 6:13 PM #

    Goog

    Thank you for your continued research into this area. I do want to point out, however, that this site contains many disclaimers, including it is not a legal advice site and that “[t]he following are the general steps to a paternity case (in Milwaukee County-other counties may be different).” [emphasis add as this case is not in Milwaukee County]

    I appreciate that you have strong feelings about someone leaving a tiny child with someone who didn’t want her (I do, too), but I think that there are two reasons to believe that this was NOT the case with Joshua: (1) he accepted custody of London Marie (he could have refused to let Jessica leave her with him) and (2) the Grandfather’s statement that Josh “loved that child. I know that for a fact, […] [h]is main focus was taking care of that child.” See https://faeriekat.wordpress.com/2007/12/14/more-details-emerge-on-london-maries-death/

    Thanks for your continued interest.

    Kat

  10. Faerie♥Kat January 7, 2008 at 6:15 PM #

    Goog

    Thank you for your continued research into this area. I do want to point out, however, that this site contains many disclaimers, including it is not a legal advice site and that “[t]he following are the general steps to a paternity case (in Milwaukee County-other counties may be different).” [emphasis add as this case is not in Milwaukee County]

    I appreciate that you have strong feelings about someone leaving a tiny child with someone who didn’t want her (I do, too), but I think that there are two reasons to believe that this was NOT the case with Joshua: (1) he accepted custody of London Marie (he could have refused to let Jessica leave her with him) and (2) the Grandfather’s statement that Josh “loved that child. I know that for a fact, […] [h]is main focus was taking care of that child.” See https://faeriekat.wordpress.com/2007/12/14/more-details-emerge-on-london-maries-death/

    Thanks for your continued interest.

    Kat

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: