Nineteen- year-old rapist sues 15-year-old rape victim for child support. And wins.

@ebrown p,

Quote:

Again I ask how your opinion would change were this a 19 year old boy having sex with a 15 year old girl.

You're asking me again? You never asked me the first time.

But I'll answer anyway: if the judge awarded custody to the father and ordered the mother to pay child support, my answer would remain exactly the same.

0 Replies

@mysteryman,

Quote:

There is no way he should have to pay support, and he wasnt given the choice about wether or not he wanted to be a parent.

Of course the father was given the choice about whether or not he wanted to be a parent. That occurred when he chose to have unprotected sex with a 19-year old woman.

3 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Quote:

Of course the father was given the choice about whether or not he wanted to be a parent. That occurred when he chose to have unprotected sex with a 19-year old woman.

I'm not sure how someone who is not legally considered to have informed consent for the act itself could be expected to have informed consent for the consequences of the act.

And I'm sure you want to discuss how a court of law would or wouldn't agree with that argument, but I'm putting it out there more as a common sense idea.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

My question is, what happens to the baby if the woman is found guilty?

I don't think folks convicted of sex crimes with minors are considered the best parents.....

0 Replies

@CalamityJane,

Quote:

The teenage woman is not a rapist, she had intercourse with a minor who was 15 years old at the time, and she was 19 years old.

Is there a double-standard, here?

Texas law (I think) is that sex can be consensual if the participants are within two years of age.

Four years difference seems a bit much to me.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Quote:

I'm not sure how someone who is not legally considered to have informed consent for the act itself could be expected to have informed consent for the consequences of the act.

"Consent" and "choice" are two entirely different things.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

This is ridiculous Joe. You are refusing to address the double standard.

There is a drastic imbalance...

The woman made the choice to have unprotected sex with the boy and the boy made the choice to have unprotected sex with the woman. Equal... you say?

But, the woman has the choice to end the pregnancy if she feels that at her young age she is not ready to become a parent (in spite of the fact she chose to have unprotected sex with a minor)... the boy has no such right.

The woman has the right to put the kid up for adoption, thus ending her parental/financial obligations... the boy has no such right.

The woman committed a criminal act... the boy did not.

I would like to clarify your response to my last point.... So I will ask the question directly again. If it were a 19-year old man having sex with a 15-year old girl... would you still support the man forcing the girl to become a parent, getting custody of the kid and then seeking financial support?

The ages are important, as is the fact a crime was committed.

2 Replies

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago wrote:

"Consent" and "choice" are two entirely different things.

Which doesn't address the issue, does it?

Call it "choice" or call it "consent," either the 15-year-old is expected to understand the consequences, or he isn't.

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

Quote:

The woman committed a criminal act... the boy did not.

Allegedly....

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

Lets see, she was 19 and he was 15.
It has been confirmed that the boy is the father, so that means they had sex.
That means it is statutory rape at least, and that is a crime.

You can say "allegedly" if you want, but that doesnt change the facts.

1 Reply

@mysteryman,

0 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

This is ridiculous Joe. You are refusing to address the double standard.

No, I'm just refusing to give you the response that you want.

ebrown p wrote:

The woman made the choice to have unprotected sex with the boy and the boy made the choice to have unprotected sex with the woman. Equal... you say?

But, the woman has the choice to end the pregnancy if she feels that at her young age she is not ready to become a parent (in spite of the fact she chose to have unprotected sex with a minor)... the boy has no such right.

Quite correct, but then the boy doesn't have the right to tell her to have the baby either. She has the right to decide because she's the one who is pregnant. It's as simple as that. Let me illustrate:

Suppose Pedestrian is jaywalking in the middle of a busy street. Driver is driving down the street, but he is texting one of his friends and is not watching where he is going. Driver hits and injures Pedestrian. Both concede that each is 50 percent responsible for the accident -- Pedestrian because she was jaywalking, Driver because he was driving negligently. Under the laws of their jurisdiction, each is 50 liable for the damages arising from the accident. Since Pedestrian was the only one injured, that means that Driver is 50 percent liable for Pedestrian's damages. Now, Pedestrian must have surgery, and she has two choices. She can have the inexpensive surgery, which is guaranteed to fix her injuries, but she'll be left with a slight limp for the rest of her life. Or she can have the expensive surgery, which will cure her completely and not leave her with a limp. If Pedestrian chooses the inexpensive surgery, Driver will have to pay $10,000. If she chooses the expensive surgery, Driver will have to pay $100,000. Driver tells Pedestrian: "since I have to pay for half of the surgery, I have the right to decide which surgery you have. Here's $10,000. If you want the expensive surgery, you'll have to pay the rest of it yourself."

The question: should Driver have the right to make Pedestrian accept his demand?

ebrown p wrote:

I would like to clarify your response to my last point.... So I will ask the question directly again. If it were a 19-year old man having sex with a 15-year old girl... would you still support the man forcing the girl to become a parent, getting custody of the kid and then seeking financial support?

Certainly not.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

The pedestrian argument you are making... (sorry couldn't resist) doesn't match the situation at all... for two reasons.

Statutory rape laws being the first. The law is very clear that when an adult (and the law sees a 19-year old as an adult) has sex with a minor... the adult is responsible.

There is no 50/50 responsibility here under the law. This law was made because 19-year-olds are much different than kids; they have the ability to manipulate, more resources and more power.

If you are arguing that we shouldn't have statutory rape laws.. that is one thing. But it doesn't sound like you are making this argument.

But the main point is that applying laws unequally based on the gender of the victim and the perpetrator is wrong. (And I noticed in the example you gave you didn't even mention the gender of either the driver or the pedestrian).

The injustice is clear. What happens when a 19-year-old man has a child with a 15-year-old girl should be the same as what happens here.

This boy is being unfairly treated simply because of his gender.

1 Reply

@DrewDad,

DrewDad wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:
Consent" and "choice" are two entirely different things.

Which doesn't address the issue, does it?

That depends. I'm not sure what issue you want addressed.

DrewDad wrote:

Call it "choice" or call it "consent," either the 15-year-old is expected to understand the consequences, or he isn't.

"Consent" is a legal concept, "choice" is not. You didn't want to talk about the legal aspects, you were just "putting it out there more as a common sense idea." I'm not sure what those "common sense" notions are. If you're suggesting that 15-year olds shouldn't be held responsible for any of their actions, that's clearly wrong -- from a legal or a common sense perspective. If the 15-year old in this case had shot the 19-year old instead of having sex with her, I think you'd agree that he should be held responsible for that.

I'm not sure, then, why it would be "common sense" to hold the 15-year old responsible for shooting someone but not for impregnating someone. After all, the legal concept of "consent" in the case of statutory rape is designed to protect minors from adults, not to protect adults from minors. Moreover, the act of sex and the consequence of that act are two different things. Statutory rape is a criminal matter, child custody and support is a civil matter. The minor can be protected in the former case and still be held responsible in the latter.

Furthermore, from a public policy standpoint, the interests of the child must be taken into account. Of the three interested parties (the father, the mother, and the child), it is abundantly clear that the child is the only one who does not bear any responsibility for its conception. Thus, it should not bear any of the responsibility for the circumstances of that conception.

3 Replies

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

The pedestrian argument you are making... (sorry couldn't resist) doesn't match the situation at all... for two reasons.

Statutory rape laws being the first. The law is very clear that when an adult (and the law sees a 19-year old as an adult) has sex with a minor... the adult is responsible.

Criminal responsibility is a totally separate issue, and it has no bearing on either my hypothetical or on your question. Child custody and support determinations are made without regard to the circumstances of the child's conception (with the possible exceptions of incest and forcible rape, but I'm not even sure it's relevant in those cases either).

ebrown p wrote:

But the main point is that applying laws unequally based on the gender of the victim and the perpetrator is wrong. (And I noticed in the example you gave you didn't even mention the gender of either the driver or the pedestrian).

Actually, I did. But you're just changing the terms of the debate. You didn't mention anything about gender disparities before. If you want to talk about that now, that's fine. But I do wish you'd make up your mind.

Quote:

The injustice is clear. What happens when a 19-year-old man has a child with a 15-year-old girl should be the same as what happens here.

I'm not sure it would be different. Why wouldn't it be possible for the 15-year old girl to have custody of the child and the 19-year old man to pay support?

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

To me, this has been about gender disparities from the beginning. I am sorry if my posts weren't clear to you on this. This is precisely what I want to talk about.

Quote:

Why wouldn't it be possible for the 15-year old girl to have custody of the child and the 19-year old man to pay support?

No. In this case it was the 19-year old perp who got custody, and the 15 year old kid who had to pay support.

The question is, if the 19-year old perp who got custody were a man, and the 15 year old kid who had to pay the man money were a girl... would your position be the same?

(This question ignores for the moment the larger issue of reproductive rights).

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

ebrown p wrote:

The question is, if the 19-year old perp who got custody were a man, and the 15 year old kid who had to pay the man money were a girl... would your position be the same?

Sure, why not?

I suppose I might be surprised that a judge deemed the 15-year old girl to be financially capable of paying child support -- just as I'm surprised in this case by the judge's decision to order a 15-year old boy to pay child support -- but then there are some surprisingly wealthy 15-year old girls out there.

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Quote:

That depends. I'm not sure what issue you want addressed.

Sounds like you weren't trying to address an issue, then.

How's the weather?

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Are you incapable of having discussions without being a pedantic A-hole?

If you're trying to help laymen understand the law or the purpose of the law, then you may wish to revisit your strategy.

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Quote:

Statutory rape is a criminal matter, child custody and support is a civil matter. The minor can be protected in the former case and still be held responsible in the latter.

Now this was actually helpful. Thank you.

1 Reply

Nineteen- year-old rapist sues 15-year-old rape victim for child support. And wins.

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know