How the system works

**Percy** · 17th-December-2009

Babies' Daddy

by Rob Blackstock
by Rob Blackstock
I recently had a first-hand lesson in the unintended consequences of government regulation. As the reader probably knows, unintended consequences are the unconsidered effects of regulation. Or, as Lowell Gallaway put it, "a failure to take into account behavioral responses in structuring public policy [which] leads to results that are often the opposite of what the rhetoric of the public policy debate suggests will happen."

My adventure began in August of 2004 when I received a letter from the Office of the District Attorney in Tangipahoa Parish, Louisiana. My first thought was, "where in the heck is Tangipahoa Parish?" This letter informed me that I was the noncustodial (sic) parent of three children between the ages of three and twelve and that I was expected to appear two weeks hence with all appropriate financial documents so that child support payments could be arranged.

My wife received this letter with much better humor than did I.

I called the Office and spoke with the Child Support Division representative. Politely, I explained that, although I was native of Louisiana, I had been living in Alabama and Florida for nearly ten years and had only just returned. I then suggested that perhaps they had me confused with another Robert Blackstock as I had no knowledge whatsoever of the accusing mother.

The representative asked for my social security number, which I gave. After a short pause she announced, "Nope. You’re him. We’ll see you in two weeks."

At this point I broke down and hired a lawyer.

The lawyer listened to my story and told me that he had these cases all the time. Here’s how the system works: a non-married mother applies for aid in one of Louisiana’s myriad wealth distribution offices, perhaps welfare. The State then asks the mother the name of the child’s (or children’s) father. This is a requirement for receiving aid in Louisiana. The State then seizes the money from the recalcitrant father.

So how did I get pulled into this? After assuring my attorney several times that there was no possible way in this or any other world that I was the father of these children he told me that either my name was pulled from the Internet or someone volunteered my name to the mother (perhaps one of my students). Once the D.A.’s office knew my name and city of residence, it would be fairly easy to pull my driver’s license information and learn everything about me including the aforementioned social security number.

My attorney called the D.A.’s office and told the representative the same thing I had, only with bigger words in order to justify a $175 per hour fee. He stated that I had been absent from Louisiana for almost ten years and couldn’t have been available to cause the pregnancy which resulted in the two youngest children. The D.A.’s office amended the complaint and now accused me of being the noncustodial (sic) parent of only the eldest child.
We immediately sent a request for DNA testing to confirm paternity.

I thought testing was a bit superfluous. If this woman knew me well enough to bear three children, wouldn’t she be able to answer a few simple questions? How tall is the father? Where did he go to school? Does he have any birthmarks or tattoos? Does he have brothers? Sisters? What type of vehicles did he drive during this time? If the woman actually knew me, shouldn’t she be able to answer at least 50% of these common questions?

This approach, sadly, is too simple for the State. So, DNA testing, it was.

Again, my attorney warned me; "If you take the test and you are the father, you’ll have to pay for the tests. If you are not the father, the State pays for the test."

What about the mother?

"Nope. She’s not charged anything."

So the mother could, in theory, just keep offering different names ad infinitum and the State would continue to harass these poor souls?

"Yep."

And she would never be punished in any way whatsoever?

"That’s right."

As the Libertarian scholar, John Sophocleus would say, "Happy Day."

The D.A.’s office agreed to our demands and sent a letter ordering me to appear at the Lincoln Parish Civic Center for DNA testing on January 3, 2005 at 10am. I did so and, luckily, had the technician sign and date my order so that I would have some proof that testing had occurred.

After two months we had heard nothing from the Tangipahoa District Attorney’s Office concerning the results of the test. Finally, we learned something; we learned that bureaucrats are inefficient even in Louisiana.
On March 7, an armed man appeared on my doorstep and served me with papers ordering me to appear in court and either comply with DNA testing or to show sufficient cause why I should not.

At this point, I had a proverbial aneurism.

Once again I had to call the attorney’s office (did I mention that the attorney cost $175 an hour and that they charge their clients in 15 minute increments and that even a 2 minute call would cost me $43.75?). By now, my case had been kicked up to the senior partner in the firm who began calling the Assistant D.A. himself and demanding some competency.

Finally, the right hand and the left found each other in Tangipahoa Parish (accidentally, I’m sure) and sent us the lab results proving that I am no "baby’s daddy." Furthermore, I received a final bill from my attorneys (that’s right; it’s now plural) for nearly $1500.

Which brings me back to the subject of this diatribe: unintended consequences.

See more at: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/blackstock1.html

**Meadester** · 17th-December-2009

What the state did to that man is disgusting!

"No punishment will ever be handed down to the mother because that would 'hurt the children.'" As if teaching them that it pays to be a slimy, underhanded crook doesn't hurt the children more.

**Marx** · 17th-December-2009

It's high-time women were forced to pay for their lies - with cold, hard cash rather than pity-me tears.

And if the argument about charging her would deprive the children, they should've thought about that prior to attempting paternity fraud (reverse?) and, in worst case-scenarios, they can simply put the fines on hold until her youngest is 18... and then she has had chance to either save it up or can start working a full-time job to pay off her fines.

**Shagda** · 17th-December-2009

It's high-time women were forced to pay for their lies - with cold, hard cash rather than pity-me tears.

Your dam right Marx, letting them "cry over it" and walk away unscathed is NOT teaching them a lesson.No on the contrary, its teaching them that in fact they can get away with lieing (even in a court of law) and either the "state" or more often "some guy" will have to pick up the bill.

Paternity fraud, false rape, fake DV......Its all the same to these bitches...Just another "game" at OUR expense!

**Nynrah Ghost** · 17th-December-2009

This is outrageous, that the state can just harras a random man based on a name that a woman gives and make the man pay up for EVERYTHING in order to protect himself from the most criminal kind of organisation there is: the government.

$1500 is not a joke, this is serious theft, state instituted robbery, actually, it is legal terrorism.

Not to sound harsh or crude, but it is about time that women who lie and instigate such situations - be it paternity fraud, false rape charges and so on - are shown with an iron fist that their lies are not to be accepted and will be punished. All they do now is ensuring women that they can lie and do not have to expect any negative consequences, only rewards.

It's also sick how the children are being used as an excuse. Not only does it insinuates that only mothers are importnant for children as they may not be harmed by the state while it's completely fine to incarcecate a father, but it doesn't serves the children's interrests at all, it only aids holding up feminist ideology. In the end, the children are just 'weapons', and feminist want to tell us that only women are objectified huh?

**RebelliousVanilla** · 17th-December-2009

Quote from Nynrah Ghost

This is outrageous, that the state can just harras a random man based on a name that a woman gives and make the man pay up for EVERYTHING in order to protect himself from the most criminal kind of organisation there is: the government.

$1500 is not a joke, this is serious theft, state instituted robbery, actually, it is legal terrorism.

Not to sound harsh or crude, but it is about time that women who lie and instigate such situations - be it paternity fraud, false rape charges and so on - are shown with an iron fist that their lies are not to be accepted and will be punished. All they do now is ensuring women that they can lie and do not have to expect any negative consequences, only rewards.

It's also sick how the children are being used as an excuse. Not only does it insinuates that only mothers are importnant for children as they may not be harmed by the state while it's completely fine to incarcecate a father, but it doesn't serves the children's interrests at all, it only aids holding up feminist ideology. In the end, the children are just 'weapons', and feminist want to tell us that only women are objectified huh?

Here the person that loses a court case can be asked to pay all the court costs of the victor.

**Shagda** · 18th-December-2009

Quote from RebelliousVanilla

Here the person that loses a court case can be asked to pay all the court costs of the victor.

And that is exactly as it should be.

**RebelliousVanilla** · 18th-December-2009

Quote from Shagda

And that is exactly as it should be.

Obviously.

**Dylan MacVillain** · 18th-December-2009

I'm tired of getting e-mails from my fellow Americans that speak effusively of patriotism and listening to speeches that do the same when the average American takes this type tyranny sitting down, or, worse yet, right up the ol' cornhole. It's time for people to recognize what the real problem is and do something about it.

THE probelm is NOT women. Yes, women are A problem due to the manipulative indoctrination that they have received over the last half century. However, THE problem is the STATE, whether the issue is misandry, race quotas, open borders, imperialism, the drug war, redistribution of wealth, or what have you. The state has divided us into classes and groups of citizens to weaken and confuse us, while the corporate fascists rape, pillage and plunder us at will. Most people keep running to the government to "fix" the problem, thus unwittingly acknowledging the power of the state as supreme, instead of forcing the state to recognize the supreme power of the people. Our "representatives" do not represent us. They control us. Until people recognize this and proceed accordingly, nothing will change.

The voice box and ballot box solutions are useless. The third box is the only viable option left. Some citizens are quislings and do the government's bidding for a price, i.e. Jackbooted Thugs. The others live in fear of these traitors.

As long as people are unwilling to defend themselves against this "state-sponsored terrorism", they might as well get used to grabbing their ankles because BOHICA.

**RebelliousVanilla** · 18th-December-2009

Funny enough, even the creators of this movie didn't reject the core principle of liberalism, which is non-discrimination.

AKUUS, I agree. Here the power of the government was curtailed by the Parliament withdrawing support and we needed a new cabinet. This meant they can't make a budget for 2010 and the IMF refused to lend Romania money. Which made me cheer because I told my mother that I want my government to go bankrupt, considering they're just showering themselves with the money or certain groups with political clout, while getting closer to bankruptcy. I even though about voting socialist so that we go bankrupt faster, but I couldn't get myself to do it.

And the third box is indeed the only remaining option, sadly. The Western world(I can't really call it Western, considering it involves Australia, NZ, Europe as a whole, the US, Canada - pretty much the countries built by people of European descent) needs a whole paradigm shift and the current system is so corrupt and the cancer spread so far that you can't solve the problems through simple political measures - the system needs to be destroyed completely and rebuilt from the ground up. Look at all the right wing parties, they're all having the same core principles with the left wing ones... They're socially and culturally leftists, they just have a slightly better grasp of how the economic and financial world goes. We must learn to discriminate again - this being the basis of a nation's survival. Everyone does it anyway. I discriminate in my personal life - I wouldn't date a midget, for example.

**paul parmenter** · 18th-December-2009

If only these single mothers could be persuaded always to name Barack Obama, Joe Biden et al as the fathers of their children. Forcing those who make shit laws to obey them to the letter, and subjecting them to the same soulless, heartless, incompetent, criminally expensive and criminally insane bureaucracy they inflict on normal people, might be the only way to get these pussy-worshippers to see sense.

**RebelliousVanilla** · 18th-December-2009

Quote from paul parmenter

If only these single mothers could be persuaded always to name Barack Obama, Joe Biden et al as the fathers of their children. Forcing those who make shit laws to obey them to the letter, and subjecting them to the same soulless, heartless, incompetent, criminally expensive and criminally insane bureaucracy they inflict on normal people, might be the only way to get these pussy-worshippers to see sense.

lol, Berry spent like 700 000$ in legal costs just to not show his birth certificate, if I recall properly. So I doubt he'd care that much.