Should Jaycee's Bio Dad Be Allowed to Have a DNA Testing Done?

[Tizzle]

ps. PRETEND A MAN NAMED CHARLES MANSON, TRIED TO FORCE CHILDREN OF HIS FORMER GROUPIES, to take dna, do you think the courts would make you submit? No absolutely not, because as an adult you actually have a right to NOT know who your biological parent is, and that overides any percieved right on the part of ANY possbile biological father. The court is not going to side with Slayton if this became a legal action, no way.

snipped

Except Jaycee might actually want to know. And Mr. Slayton is absolutely not comparable, at all, to Charles Manson. PERIOD.

 

[Imbackon]

Different states have different time limits, but no Mr. Slayton would not be liable for 11 years of back child support.
You can only go back a few years basically, UNLESS they evaded payment on a previously court ordered payment. Since it appears MS. Probyn never asked for support (if she had paternity would have had to have been established first), no one can go back and try to recoup any monies.
I know this subject as I received a lump sum child support settlement for my 30 year old daughter only 3 years ago.

 

[Imbackon]

snipped

Except Jaycee might actually want to know. And Mr. Slayton is absolutely not comparable, at all, to Charles Manson. PERIOD.

I am not comparing Slayton to Charles Manson.
Neither are the courts going to take up the time to decide the "worthyness" of Slaytons legal fatherhood if he so requests. That is the whole point. Courts don't like to get involved in matters like this, and unless you are talking about a childs right to have a legal father or mother and that time has passed passed passed.

If Jc wants to know, NO COURT ACTION FOR DNA would be necessary now would it.

It is simple, if JC WANTS TO KNOW, no court action is required. If JC does not want nor care to know, NO ONE CAN MAKE HER FIND OUT.
Her rights supercede any percieved right of Slaytons. Wouldn't you rather have it that way, or would you like to live in a country where folks can go around making you take DNA tests? Your DNA is yours, unless you are being forced to take DNA due to criminal actions,

 

[Tizzle]

I am not comparing Slayton to Charles Manson.
Neither are the courts going to take up the time to decide the "worthyness" of Slaytons legal fatherhood if he so requests. That is the whole point. Courts don't like to get involved in matters like this, and unless you are talking about a childs right to have a legal father or mother and that time has passed passed passed.

If Jc wants to know, NO COURT ACTION FOR DNA would be necessary now would it.

It is simple, if JC WANTS TO KNOW, no court action is required. If JC does not want nor care to know, NO ONE CAN MAKE HER FIND OUT.
Her rights supercede any percieved right of Slaytons. Wouldn't you rather have it that way, or would you like to live in a country where folks can go around making you take DNA tests? Your DNA is yours, unless you are being forced to take DNA due to criminal actions,

BBM
Where in the world would you get the idea that that is my line of thinking? Do you even read any of my posts before you type? Where do I ever say that I think Jaycee should be forced to do anything? I mean, really.

Jaycee probably already gave DNA when her identity was discovered to determine her maternity to the girls. You think it was her idea or do you think someone else told her she had to? So, in a sense, she was forced to then.

 

[mysteriew]

I don't know if she can be forced to submit to a paternity test or not. But somehow I doubt it. How many times have we seen adults who have claimed that a celebrity was their absent father? And often there is no resolution to the question of their parentage, unless the alleged father in question would agree to a DNA test. So I would guess there might be a statute of limitations on that. But why would GA make threats if she knew there was a limit on when a paternity action could be taken?

 

[mysteriew]

Different states have different time limits, but no Mr. Slayton would not be liable for 11 years of back child support.
You can only go back a few years basically, UNLESS they evaded payment on a previously court ordered payment. Since it appears MS. Probyn never asked for support (if she had paternity would have had to have been established first), no one can go back and try to recoup any monies.
I know this subject as I received a lump sum child support settlement for my 30 year old daughter only 3 years ago.

Many states allow the child to sue for paternity when they attain the age of majority, if the mother didn't establish paternity. But Jaycee was still in captivity when she turned 18. So it is possible the court might make an exception because of that.

 

[kbl8201]

How can you be so sure he hasn't already made a contribution to Jaycee? I would hope he wouldn't announce it if he has. If he did announce that he had, you'd be mad that he felt the need to announce it. I would be VERY surprised if he hasn't already PRIVATELY sent money. It would actually be foolish of him not to when you really think about it.....

if that's his motiation then why does he need the mouthpiece

 

[kbl8201]

When I first read this the other day, it instantly raised my suspicions that Mr. Slayton may have already tried to make contact privately but was met with strong opposition. The quote also says "may take legal action" not "will take legal action". Very different.

really? cause to me it sounds like "do it my way or i'll take you to court". it's an implied threat. and it's his lawyer issuing it. and she's acting on his behalf. maybe he thinks she's still 11 and thinks he's actually taking her mom to court. i dont know. but she's not a kid anymore. he'd have to take her to court to get her to take the paternity test

 

[Imbackon]

Many states allow the child to sue for paternity when they attain the age of majority, if the mother didn't establish paternity. But Jaycee was still in captivity when she turned 18. So it is possible the court might make an exception because of that.

That may be true regarding the child's right to a parent, makes sense, but we are talking about whether Slayton has the right at this point in time to have paternity decided, not JC's rights to any court action.

Slayton was not denied his right he just choose to ignore it, which is quite different. Since he had reason to believe he may be a parent, the onus was on him to file for paternity.
When folks say, "he lost touch", this is no excuse. He could still have had legal avenues to enforce his rights as a parent.
If he had pursued this in almost any way while she was a child, i would go along with the possibility of his chances of having himself named her father, but I have not read anything yet that appears to suggest he did.

 

[kbl8201]

He said in one interview that he followed that case. Terry named him as the father when Jaycee was kidnapped and did cooperate with authorities at that time.

he cooperated with authorities only to clear his own name.
to no one's knowledge did he ever do anything to help carl or terry find her.
and the reason the authorties dismissed him as a suspect, other then they had carl set up in the lee harvey oswald role, was the fact they realized he didnt give two cents about her

 

[JBean]

he cooperated with authorities only to clear his own name.
to no one's knowledge did he ever do anything to help carl or terry find her.
and the reason the authorties dismissed him as a suspect, other then they had carl set up in the lee harvey oswald role, was the fact they realized he didnt give two cents about her

I didn't have any of that information. thank you. I was only reporting what information I had.

 

[Imbackon]

BBM
Where in the world would you get the idea that that is my line of thinking? Do you even read any of my posts before you type? Where do I ever say that I think Jaycee should be forced to do anything? I mean, really.

Jaycee probably already gave DNA when her identity was discovered to determine her maternity to the girls. You think it was her idea or do you think someone else told her she had to? So, in a sense, she was forced to then.

If I am not mistaken this whole thread is about whether jc can be made to take dna and was not speaking to you directly until you said, maybe she wants to take DNA (which makes the question moot), and regarding my "comparison" to Manson. I was not comparing Manson to Slayton, Manson and Slayton would be equal in the eyes of the law, I was just showing WHY someone may choose to not know dna results, with Manson being a good example of why someone would NOT want to know.

I don't get your statement about JC and daughters. Are you saying you think she did DNA testing voluntarily or was forced? there is no "in a sense" about it, either one would be forced or volunteer. They may volunteer because they are forced by circumstance, but that is a very different thing.

 

[kbl8201]

I didn't have any of that information. thank you. I was only reporting what information I had.

its ok. your trying to be unbias. i respect that. im very cynical when it comes to stuff like this cause of my own father situation. lets just say if my dad poppped up after 30 years (a strange connection here, since athat's how long my dad is out of the picture so far0 and asked/requested/demanded a meeting id tell him to pound dirt.......but like i've said, its up to jaycee. not us, and certianly not him

 

[Natal]

I don't know if she can be forced to submit to a paternity test or not. But somehow I doubt it. How many times have we seen adults who have claimed that a celebrity was their absent father? And often there is no resolution to the question of their parentage, unless the alleged father in question would agree to a DNA test. So I would guess there might be a statute of limitations on that. But why would GA make threats if she knew there was a limit on when a paternity action could be taken?

Since she deals with these things, she probably has a pretty clear idea of what can and can't be done. I think that that it will come down to a petition for visitation rights with the grandchildren, and a DNA test to establish lineage will be requested from the court on the basis of the prior allegation of paternity made when Jaycee was originally kidnapped. Without that allegation GA likely wouldnt be able to make a case for doing the test since there would be insufficient basis for claiming lineage. But, the claim was made, so there is a reasonable evidentiary trail to support such a petition, whether a DNA test is done or not. If Jaycee refuses to take the DNA test (which would likely result in a contempt charge, if she had been ordered to do so), the court may order visitation anyway on that basis.

But I don't think any of that will happen. More likely the opposing sides will puff up their chests a little for a while, and then do the right thing through a settlement (which we will never hear about).

 

[Natal]

I don't get your statement about JC and daughters. Are you saying you think she did DNA testing voluntarily or was forced? there is no "in a sense" about it, either one would be forced or volunteer. They may volunteer because they are forced by circumstance, but that is a very different thing.

I think her DNA was taken when she was recovered to prove that she was who she said she was, so LE would have that. LE criminal evidence isnt subject to a third party civil suit (I think), so they probably wouldnt be able to get it from that source.

 

[JBean]

California Family Code lets grandparents file for visitation:
· If one of the child’s parents has died.
· If the grandchild’s parents are no married, separated, or divorced.
· During custody proceedings.
· If the child is not living with either parent.

However:
· There must be a pre-established grandparent-grandchild relationship.
· Visits cannot get in the way of a parent’s own visitations.
· Visits must be in the best interest of the grandchild.

http://www.californiafamilylawblog.com/2006/11/for_grandparent_visitation_thr_1.html


ETA: I am wondering if that is just oversimplifed, so here's the actual code.There is most likely some good reading in here:
http://law.justia.com/california/codes/fam/3100-3105.html

 

[Natal]

The relevant code is as follows:

3104. (a) On petition to the court by a grandparent of a minor
child, the court may grant reasonable visitation rights to the
grandparent if the court does both of the following:
(1) Finds that there is a preexisting relationship between the
grandparent and the grandchild that has engendered a bond such that
visitation is in the best interest of the child.
(2) Balances the interest of the child in having visitation with
the grandparent against the right of the parents to exercise their
parental authority.

On the surface that may make such a petition unlikely to succeed (it could however still be filed), but the petitioners could claim that because of the circumstances of the case (specifically the forcible confinement as a result of a criminal act), 3104(a)(1) doesnt apply in this particular case.

 

[kbl8201]

California Family Code lets grandparents file for visitation:
· If one of the child’s parents has died.
· If the grandchild’s parents are no married, separated, or divorced.
· During custody proceedings.
· If the child is not living with either parent.

However:
· There must be a pre-established grandparent-grandchild relationship.
· Visits cannot get in the way of a parent’s own visitations.
· Visits must be in the best interest of the grandchild.

http://www.californiafamilylawblog.com/2006/11/for_grandparent_visitation_thr_1.html


ETA: I am wondering if that is just oversimplifed, so here's the actual code.There is most likely some good reading in here:
http://law.justia.com/california/codes/fam/3100-3105.html

he's pretty much screwed then. good.
unless he gets it moved to minny......or whatever rock he crawled out from under

 

[Natal]

Another unusual aspect of this case is that the mother herself did not excercise parental authority over the children, it was the father and his wife. The children regarded their mother as their sister. So, would it be possible to make an argument that Jaycee isn't the mother from a legal point of view as well?

 

[Openmind]

If Jaycee declines his request, surely this man would not force himself on her and the girls this way. I hope all this legal talk is just forum babble because if he did take this to that level, he truly is self centered. No way can he truly care about Jaycee or his new found grandchildren and put them through those kind of proceedings.