Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy Flamer
Isn't this making a bit of an assumption that this guy was willingly and deliberately circumventing the law? I haven't seen any evidence to suggest that. For all we know, he may have very well thought that the contract he signed would be legally sufficient to absolve him of financial responsibility for the child.
And I'm still not sure why mom #2 is getting off the hook so easily. There isn't much information regarding this in the article, but can it not be assumed that she and her partner were in an adult interdependant relationship of some sort and that she would have been a guardian of the child. Surely she would have participated in the day to care care of the child and would have been a large part in this child's upbringing.
|
None of that matters. You can't contract around the law and ignorance of the law is not an excuse.
As for Mom #2, I agree. It is curious that she seems to be getting off the hook.