Nick Olivas was justifiably a bit surprised when he received papers for $15,000 in back child support for a six-year-old child that he never knew that he had fathered. He was even more surprised that the demand and threat of jail was triggered by a woman who had had sex with him when he was 14. That would constitute statutory rape and make the woman a rapist but he never reported the crime to the police. Now he could go to jail at the behest of the woman.
The woman was 20 when she had sex with the 14 year old boy. He could not legally consent to such relations under state law.
Olivas wants to be part of his daughter’s life and balks at the notion of back payments, including while he was a minor. He is now 24. He is a high school graduate and went to college and became a medical assistant.
When he received the original notice, he ignored it and never got the required paternity test. The state finally tracked him down and demand $15,000 in back child support and medical bills going back to the child’s birth, plus 10 percent interest. His bank account was seized and now his wages are being garnished at $380 a month.
He is not the first such case, but there are distinctions. In 1993, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that a boy who impregnated his 17 year old baby sitter was liable of child support. She could consent to sex but not him. California also ruled that child support was due from a 15-year-old who was statutorily raped by a 34-year-old woman who was convicted of the crime. California Judge Arthur Gilbert (right) said that the boy was not entirely innocent in the matter despite the lack of legal consent:
California law provides that every child has a right to support from both parents. (Fam. Code, §§ 3900, 3901 [former Civ. Code, §§ 196, 196a, 242]; County of Shasta v. Caruthers (1995) 31 Cal. App. 4th 1838, 1841 [38 Cal.Rptr.2d 18].) Family Code section 3900 provides that, subject to other statutes governing support, the father and mother of a child bear “equal responsibility” to support the child.
The law should not except Nathaniel J. from this responsibility because he is not an innocent victim of Jones’s criminal acts. After discussing the matter, he and Jones decided to have sexual relations. They had sexual intercourse approximately five times over a two-week period.
Here is that opinion: San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J.
Olivas now lives in Phoenix and Arizona has no exemption for children born to children.
Source: USA Today
Squeeky, I disagree strongly w/ your take on this. But, it’s such a breath of fresh air to discuss w/ a person of intellect and just plain sanity!! You are a gem here, kiddo.
I can understand this young man wanting to get custody. But I do not think it is reasonable to expect him to “want” to pay back child support to his sexual predator. That is not reasonable.
@Jack
Contract law and domestic relations law are not the same thing. In some states, they even have separate judges hearing the two kinds of cases. “Law” judges hear contract cases, and “equity” judges hear divorce and child support cases. You are mixing apples and oranges.
Nick and the Cougar did not enter into a contract. They just had sex and made a baby. it is viewed as a matter of “fairness”, with the child’s welfare being the focus.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Raff, it appears some may have an “agenda” against teachers and jump to conclusions, a premature conclusionation, as it were. 🙂
Paul:
“In Arizona, if the age difference is two years or less, no statutory rape charges are applicable, if both of them are over a certain age.”
That makes sense.
Jack, and how was I wrong? It is slut shaming and misogynistic.
raff, I introduced the related topic of the alarming number of cases the past few years of female teachers raping male students.
Squeeky,
The judge isn’t using “common sense”. The judge is ruling in accordance with the law. The law is wrong. A 14 year old cannot enter into a contract. Therefore, no matter how much he enjoys it, the child is the product of a rape, and if the rapist cannot pay to raise the child, it should be the responsibility of the state.
FYI: In response to one of my first posts on this blog, I was called a misogynist by Annie. She did so because I referred to females having sex as “recreational”.
<blockquote?Jack
Annie,
Why do you think an employer should pay for the protective equipment for the employee’s off-the-clock recreational activities? Is it just because the protective equipment requires a prescription from a doctor?
http://jonathanturley.org/2014/08/05/ginsburg-male-justices-do-not-understand-issues-affecting-women-in-hobby-lobby/#comment-1252899
The hypocrisy is clearly demonstrated.
@Jack
You ares stuck on “theoretical fairness.” A judge is faced with REALITY. If Nick don’t pay child support, the innocent little kid goes without stuff in life. The judge is using his common sense and assessing that Nick probably enjoyed the encounter, that it was “rape” by statutory definition only, and that the people who had the fun, ought to do the paying for the child, not society.
This is also why you see older women who have sex with teen age boys get relatively light sentences. You can say that it ought to be the same for young women and young men, but it isn’t.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
squeeky – the judge is not using common sense since the judge is not sending the woman to jail for statutory rape.
It doesn’t happen often, but I agree with Nick that 15 year old boys are in a constant battle controlling their sexual urges. Also, why I agree that it seems unfair for 15 year olds to be treated as adults in criminal cases, but not in statutory rape cases, the young man could not legally consent to the sex so the woman raped him. As Annie alluded to, a statute of limitations may apply, but it may not begin to run until the boy reached the legal age under California law.
Nick, I am confused, however, where in the source article it says that the woman was a teacher? All I read was that the father was in high school and the woman was 20 years old.
“Lookin’ For Love In All The Wrong Places.”
Squeeky, did someone just call you a psycho? Is that civil? 😮
Squeeky, I don’t agree with charging minors as adults.
The general rule of thumb for age difference is 5 years. I think that makes sense. When young, an age difference of 5 years is pretty significant.
15 year-old boys like cars a lot too. That doesn’t mean we permit them to enter into a contract to purchase one. Do we?
DBQ, Feminism, in this case, means women are now able to use their positions of power to rape young men. It shows their real mindset, doesn’t it. They get to be victims when appropriate and predators when they want. Incredible, isn’t it.
I find myself agreeing with Paul. The woman should be punished for raping the young man and IF he wants to, he should get custody. At the very least he should get shared custody since he is being forced to support a child he had no idea existed.
Also….a legal question. Isn’t child support based on the ability to pay? If the young man is unemployed or working at a minimum wage job, how did they set the custody amount? I believe that you are required to leave him something to live on and be able to survive himself. Or his he now merely a wage slave to his rapist with no legal rights to the child.
DBQ, I ignore psycho commenters. Just sayn’!
@DBQ
Who said I am a Feminist???
@Jack
You said, “You’ll notice that Annie keeps trying to use the 18 and 16 year old, but fails to produce that an 18 year old was convicted of statutory rape of a 16 year old. . .”
Yes, that’s the point. The “rape” isn’t a “rape” unless the ages are more than a certain number of years apart. With non-statutory rape, does anybody care about the age difference unless the victim is really elderly, at which time it comes up at sentencing?
Statutory rape varies from state to state, but there seems to be little rhyme or reason to a lot of it. 14 year olds can be tried as adults for crimes, yet aren’t considered advanced enough to decide if they want to have sex. Plus, you have to pretend that males have the same sexual ethics that females have to have. They don’t. Males sow their wild oats. Women who do the same are whores. That’s reality.
Let them take responsibility when their little “oats” blossom, or whatever oats do.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
“Half of 26 to 35-year-olds can’t find the vagina on a diagram of the female reproductive system, survey finds”
http://metro.co.uk/2014/09/02/half-of-26-to-35-year-olds-cant-find-the-vagina-on-a-diagram-of-the-female-reproductive-system-survey-finds-4853169/
“Life is full of double standards. And are they really “double”??? Boys and girls are different”
But wait!!! I thought that feminism was all about equality and being treated equal. Until it becomes a thing where being treated equal is uncomfortable for females and then a double standard is OK. So when it is NOT OK to have a double standard and when it is OK to have a double standard? No wonder men are confused and backing away from women.
So….women /girls can get pregnant. Who knew!!! How about facing the consequences of your actions….or is that only for men?
Note: I do not ascribe to the feminist doctrines and think that people are not equal either in biological capacity, man OR woman. Some people are smarter some dumber. Some people are strong, some people are weaker. People are not equal and never will be equal which is why I am against shoving a woman or man into a job that requires certain physical or mental skills or into a military position to fulfill some artificial quota.
However, under the law…all people should be treated equally and based on whether they have a penis or a vagina. The boy was raped under the law and the definition of statutory rape. Yet, you want him to have to PAY his rapist for the results of the rape and she gets no punishment?