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
Karen did you miss the comments in which I conceded that it probably was possible for a female to rape a male? Why do you skip over those comments of mine? Karen, with all due respect, you have a tendency to attribute YOUR own understanding of a person’s comments as being what the commenter meant in actuality, even when corrected by the commenter. You do this in almost every single debate.
***********************
on 1, September 4, 2014 at 1:48 pmAnnie
Upthepress, perhaps you could enlighten us? I’m not above learning that I’m wrong about something. I would like to know from a male how common it is to culminate in an ejaculation (even if the erection can be maintained) in an encounter that was frightening and unwanted. My issue here is not really that it’s impossible physiologically, I know it is probably possible, BUT I also think that if the sexual act was not forced and actually invited by the 14 year old there ARE mitigating factors, as Jack mentioned.
Squeeky:
I understand where you’re coming from, that the boy might just as well as had sex with a teenage girl. But he didn’t.
When I was in high school, I discovered that one of my friend’s mothers seduced one of her son’s friends. They had an affair that lasted for years, and it began when he was pretty young – probably 14, although I can no longer remember the details.
I do not believe it was reported to police. This boy was not “lucky.” He was ostracized. It affected him emotionally on so many levels. It is definitely not the same as two teenagers exploring sexuality together. It was absolutely predation.
I’ll bet if some Republican guy said any of these comments about a girl victim, Annie would be very upset.
What I find fault with is the double standard.
Annie:
Here is a list of what you have actually said:
“As far as a woman deciding to keep a child and not have an abortion, she is taking on the responsibility for the child, but this shouldn’t take the sperm donor off the hook. Men do not get to go depositing their genetic material in live women and have an expectation that their act will not have long term ramifications. Biology dictates that females get pregnant and carry and give birth to a child. Therefore they alone get to decide if they will carry on with the pregnancy. If and until a male human can get pregnant it won’t be their decision to make and they will still need to help bare the financial burden for the child their sperm made. As for this guy, I don’t think he should have to pay child support for his child made when he was 14, but he should WANT to.”
“And Squeeky, I bet he didn’t get raped kicking and screaming. Something enjoyable must’ve happened for an ejaculation to have occurred.”
“The woman was in the wrong for taking advantage of a 14 year old, but it did take two to tango in that female/ male rape scenario. No erection, no rape?”
“I also think that the willingness of the ‘victim’ should be taken into consideration in sentencing.”
“My issue here is not really that it’s impossible physiologically, I know it is probably possible, BUT I also think that if the sexual act was not forced and actually invited by the 14 year old there ARE mitigating factors,”
This is just to clarify why I believe that you appear to be placing at least part of the blame on the victim. You did say that she was wrong to do it, but you stated many times that he was a willing participant who enjoyed the act, and “men do not get to go depositing their genetic material in live women and have an expectation that their act will not have long term consequences.” I have not jumped to any conclusions. I have disagreed with what you said and questioned you.
Your attitude reflects the attitude of a large part of society, namely that a woman cannot rape a male. The implication is that the victim is “lucky” in some way.
If a 20 year old man “dated” an 8th grade girl, and people said what you did above, that she wasn’t kicking and screaming, etc. I would be horrified. I am horrified that this is being said about a boy.
In my opinion, the rules and regulations need to be changed. In today’s society, children are influenced by movies, peers / school, commercials / advertisements and bad parenting or no parenting. In third world countries the children are considered no longer children when they hit puberty. The unjust rules and regulations imposed by our judicial system is simply a way to acquire revenue, it destroys families. Accountability and responsibility is the only way to have justice, along with proper parenting.
Another issue that has not been addressed in the article (perhaps it is elsewhere) is the relationship between the older woman and the young boy. Was she in a position of authority? If so then the charges of rape should be even more strictly enforced.
I also find myself in the strange position of agreeing with Annie in that the young man should not be responsible for child support for a child that was the product of him being raped when he was a minor himself. It is ludicrous to go back and have a CHILD pay child support.
rafflaw:
“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.”
And then, a miracle happened, and Nick, Rafflaw, and Karen S all agreed. I will now frame this and put it on my wall as a testament to world peace. 🙂
I also disagree with trying children as adults. I think that there should be some stricter sentencing if the child is a true danger to society, but by definition, he should not be tried as an adult.
I think some people are confused at the difference between rape (being against one’s will) and statutory rape (which implies lack of legal ability to consent.)
Here is a link to a paper on female sex offenders:
http://www.csom.org/pubs/female_sex_offenders_brief.pdf
This story is not about a priest molesting an 8 year old. it is about an older woman having consensual sex with a 14 year old boy. That same 14 year old could have had sex with a 16 year old girl, and it wouldn’t be “statutory rape.” In that case, would anybody object to him paying child support??? Would he then have been a victim of sexual predation???
I bet to him, in the dark, the Cougar and the 16 year old are all the same.
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Karen, I said no such thing. Where did I say that this 20 year old woman didn’t take advantage of this under age boy? Jumping to conclusions seems to be the trend on this thread. However a 20 year old is far closer to 14 than a 44 year old. Some things in life are not always black and white, there are mostly gray areas that require more than a rigid adherence. In SENTENCING such cases of statuatory rape, I believe the judge has the ability to use his judgment within the law, no?
This is a bad judgment, the child is 6 and the father wants to be part of her life. The mother is incompetent in judgment and cannot support her own child. Where is the problem ? Our administration is the problem.
Annie:
“And Jack if one is 30 years older than that 13 year old girl, one could say that that person is a pedophile too.”
So, a 43 year old with a 13 year old is a pedophile, but a 20 year old with a 14 year old is not? A 14 year old is in the 8th grade.
So an adult “dating” an 8th grader is not pedophilia, by your standards?
This is not the case of a 16 year old dating an 18 year old. And it’s patently absurd to judge the “willingness” of a victim that young. Hence, the “grooming” aspect of sexual predators.
Karen, if you read carefully I actually agreed with your premise, or conceded it may be correct. HOWEVER that still doesn’t address the REALITY that there are underage males AND females that engage in consensual sex with those older than themselves. It is statuatory rape, but as I’ve said numerous times, it can be argued that there are mitigating factors in sentencing the ‘perp’.
I released several comments from the spam filter for this thread and other threads.
Paul,
A judge was not involved because the crime was never reported.
rafflaw – in Arizona to seize his wages, a judge has to be involved.
We are about to see some triple standards.
Squeeky, it is SO strange when people call you a “psycho commenter” one minute and then praise you the other. Sort of schizophrenic, IMO.
Karen, You’re introducing religion into this. If you think you have seen hypocrisy and craziness on this thread so far, hold on tight. You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.
I believe we have already addressed that the limits for statutory rape need to be addressed. In Paul’s state of AZ, they sound most reasonable, where there is no crime if the age difference is 2 years and they are over a certain age.
14 and 20 is not an innocent high school romance. It’s a sexual predator.
Annie:
“And Squeeky, I bet he didn’t get raped kicking and screaming. Something enjoyable must’ve happened for an ejaculation to have occurred.”
Have you never examined a male rape victim, as a nurse? I followed the Catholic priest pedophile scandal, and it is my understanding that many of the victims felt guilty and ashamed, because they responded in some way to the actions of their rapist. So, no, I do not blame the victim, or assign him any responsibility, of a sexual predator on the grounds that he ejaculated.
Very young boys are capable of erections, and ejaculations are possible at young ages. Do we blame these children for “enjoying it” when a predator grooms them and victimizes them?
Not in an ethical society.
Karen, Stop being logical. Tell us how you FEEEEEL!!
Karen, I stated he should WANT to pay child support from THIS TIME forward ( especially if he wants to be part of the child’s life) and that he should FIGHT back child support.