Is Paternity Fraud The Perfect Crime?
by Tony Zizza, June 1, 2005
You know the absolute destruction of "right and wrong" is complete when the global problem of paternity fraud appears to be just a matter of judicial bias and fodder for escapist television shows like Desperate Housewives.
So, what is paternity fraud? Paternity fraud occurs when a mother goes, to borrow a phrase from Carnell Smith, Director of Citizens Against Paternity Fraud, "man shopping." That is, a mother purposefully lies about who her child's biological father is. And what's the purpose of this? The mother receives/maintains a higher child support award than the real father can provide. more...
Channel 7 - Today Tonight
Divorce and child maintenance
REPORTER: Rodney Lohse, BROADCAST DATE: March 17, 2005
Liam Magill tried to sue his ex-wife for $70,000 after DNA tests revealed two of their children were not his. But the courts had ruled she did nothing wrong
When Liam Magill's marriage to his wife, Meredith, ended in 1992, he was devastated.
He not only lost a marriage but also three children.
ABC TV News show 7:30
DNA and paternity case may set mammoth precedent
Transcript 5/3/2001
KERRY O'BRIEN: First, a ticklish issue about DNA and paternity -- one that will exercise the Victorian County Court later this year and could set a precedent in family law around Australia.
A Melbourne man is suing his ex-wife for fraud and damages after he discovered what he will allege she had known all along -- that he was not the father of their two children.
The case highlights the growing role that DNA testing is playing in determining Family Court disputes.
But some people -- including the Federal Government and the Australian Medical Association -- are questioning the ethics and motives of companies that have started offering cheap, quick tests that clients can buy on mail order.
The Age
Man sues former wife over children
The Age, Australia, November 15 2002, By Ian Munro
Three years after he and his wife separated, Liam Magill found what he said was the first hint that he was not the father of all their children.
While caring for their three children during his estranged wife's illness in August, 1995, he read an entry in her diary that revealed Meredith "Pat" Magill believed a family friend had fathered their second child.
Man loses paternity payout
AAP, 17 March 2005
A man who sued his unfaithful ex-wife for falsely claiming two of their three children were his has lost his damages payout on appeal in Melbourne today. The Victorian Court of Appeal today ruled there was no evidence to show the woman intended to make false representations on the children's birth certificates.
Liam Magill, 54, was awarded $70,000 in damages and costs against his former wife Meredith Magill, 37, by the Victorian County Court in November 2002.
Mrs Magill appealed against the decision.
Justice Frank Callaway today said there was no evidence on which the County Court judge could find Mrs Magill intended her husband to rely on the birth certificates to establish his paternity.
Court reverses child support damages decision
ABC News Online, 17 March 2005
A Victorian court has reversed a decision, which awarded damages to a man who paid child support for two children that a paternity test revealed were not his.
In 2002 the County Court ordered the wife of 52-year-old Liam Magill pay him $70,000 for general damages and economic loss for child support he paid for two children he did not father.
It found the law of deceit applied because Mr Magill was falsely led to believe he was the father of the woman's two younger children.
The court heard Meredith Magill had been having an affair when her second and third children were conceived.
Today the Victorian Supreme Court upheld her appeal against damages.
Justice Jeffrey Eames found Mrs Magill did not wholly set out to deceive her husband despite an admission she suspected one of the children might not be his when she nominated him as the father on an application for child support.
Paternity Fraud
Channel 7 TV, REPORTER: Rodney Lohse, BROADCAST DATE: 17 March 2005
Liam Magill tried to sue his ex-wife for $70,000 after DNA tests revealed two of their children were not his. But the courts have ruled she did nothing wrong.
When Liam Magill's marriage to his wife, Meredith, ended in 1992, he was devastated.
He not only lost a marriage but also three children.
At times his take home pay was reduced to just $130 a week.
But a DNA test revealed that Mr Magill was not in fact the biological father of the two youngest children. They were fathered by Meredith's secret lover.
"When I heard the results I was struck dumb, I could not speak, I could not function," Mr Magill said.
"I personally found it very hard to get my head around that the kids I watched be born – even one of them might not be mine," he said. "I can't explain to people how that is, it is something you can't explain to people."
Depressed by his wife's deceit, Mr Magill was unable to continue work as a public servant
"The little girl wasn't mine either, Bonnie is a beautiful kid, she used to look after me," Mr Magill said.
Supported by his new partner, Cheryl, Mr Magill took the unprecedented step and sued his former wife for deceit.
In a landmark decision three years ago a county court judge ordered Meredith Magill to pay her ex-husband $70,000 in compensation for pain, suffering, and loss of income.
But that was not the end of it. Meredith appealed and it went before the Supreme Court
The Court of Appeal found in favour of Meredith and she will not have to pay the $70,000.
Mr Magill has been left with a big legal bill and he has to pay his ex-wife's legal costs.
Vivian Mavropolous, Mr Magill's lawyer, said that the best way she can describe it is harsh.
Mr Magill's whole case hinged on the claim he was a victim of fraud and that he was tricked into signing birth registrations.
But the court found that while Meredith was having an affair, and suspected that Mr Magill might not be the father to at least one of the children, she did not intend to deceive him and therefore it was not fraud.
Cheryl King, Mr Magill's partner said that if people are not outraged by the fact that this is acceptable then what else could they think.
"It's really not acceptable as far as this type of deceit being allowed to go ahead," she said.
Sunday Herald Sun
Wronged dad may withdraw
Melbourne, Australia, By: KELVIN HEALEY, 6th June 2004
A MAN who successfully sued his wife for paternity fraud may have to walk away from the continuing legal battle because he is broke.
Liam Magill sued his former wife Meredith and was awarded $70,000 damages in a landmark decision after DNA tests proved he was not the father of two of their three children. His ex-wife appealed the decision and the appeal is likely to be heard in the Supreme Court later this year.
But Mr Magill may not be able to defend the appeal because of the legal cost, meaning the Australian legal precedent would be overturned. more...
Herald Sun
Dads lost in cloud cuckold land
September 05, 2006 12:00am
FATHER'S Day was happy for most fathers, but a day of anguish for those whose children had died because of illness or accidents.
And fathers who do not have contact with their children because of divorce.
In this group there is a sub-section, whose grief is compounded by paternity fraud.
These fathers have been cuckolded, deceived by their wives into believing the children were theirs when they were fathered by other men.
The word cuckold is derived from the cuckoo, which places its eggs in the nests of other birds.
The plight of one such father is being considered by the Australian High Court.
Liam Magill married Meredith McClelland in April 1988.
Their first child was born in April 1989, their second in July 1990 and their third in November 199l.
In November 1992, Meredith left the family home taking the three children with her. She said she was not happy.
Two days later, she applied for child support for all three children. Liam and Meredith were divorced in February 1998.
Liam paid 32 per cent of his gross salary from November 24, 1992 until September 1999, when he could no longer work because of depression.
At one stage, the Child Support Agency left Liam $132 a week on which to survive. This increased later to $200 a week. On this meagre amount, he had to cover living expenses and weekend access visits of the three children.
Financially crippled, Liam could not cope and that is where Liam's story might have ended, another victim of "no-fault" divorce and a pawn of the CSA.
However, in February 1999 Liam met Cheryl King, who has been his tenacious friend and adviser since.
Like me, Cheryl loathes injustice. She urged Liam to get the children DNA tested. This process took almost a year.
In March 2000, the tests showed the two younger children were not his.
Meredith then told her children that her friend, Derek R, was their father, even though he was not tested for another 17 months.
In 2002, Liam sued his ex-wife for damages caused by deceit and in November 2002 Judge Hanlon in the Victorian County Court awarded Liam $70,000 in damages, excluding child support payments he had made.
In December 2002, Meredith's legal team, funded by the Victorian Women's Legal Service (ie, the taxpayer) appealed against Judge Hanlon's decision.
The appeal was heard in November 2004 and, in March last year, the Victorian Supreme Court of Appeal allowed Meredith to win on a technicality.
In mid-2004, before the hearing of Meredith's appeal, Derek R and his wife moved to Southport, Queensland.
Liam's friend Cheryl considers the CSA has not done enough to make Derek R pay for his two children, or to refund the payments made for years by Liam Magill.
In November last year, permission was given for Liam's appeal against the Victorian Supreme Court of Appeal to be heard by the High Court.
The High Court Appeal was heard in April this year but the decision has not been handed down.
Some issues remain unresolved. Why has the CSA not refunded the money extracted from Liam Magill for children he did not father?
Why has the CSA not obtained these arrears from the biological father?
And why are we taxpayers, through the feminist Victorian Women's Legal Service, involved in helping an unfaithful wife defraud her husband?
Paternity fraud is not merely financial, but goes to the heart of relationships between husband, wife and children.
The feminist attitude seems to be that which is described in Helen Garner's book, The First Stone, about a case of sexual harassment: "He may not be guilty, but other men are so he has to pay."
I hope Premier Bracks, Attorney-General Hulls and federal Minister Hockey, who oversees the CSA, had a happy Father's Day and will end the victimisation of Liam Magill.
Perhaps by establishing a men's legal service for victims of paternity fraud.
babette@endeavourforum.org.au
|
