An Interview with Paternity Advocate Eric Johnson of RuDaddy (Part II)

2007-10-05
By

Background: Paternity Advocates Eric & Donna Johnson of RuDaddy provide affordable legal assistance to men who are paying child support for children who may not be theirs. Below is the second part of my interview with Eric Johnson about the world of paternity fraud. The first part can be seen here.

Glenn: A man’s ex-girlfriend told him that her baby is his, and he’s been paying child support for the past year. The child is now 18 months old, and the man is starting to suspect that the child isn’t his. He calls R U Daddy–what do you advise him to do?
 
Eric:  The first question one of our case administrators will ask is:  “Why do you suspect the child isn’t yours?” We listen to find out what’s going on in his life and whether he has made any decisions about how to go forward.
 
Based upon his opening conversation we would ask unplanned questions to develop a more detailed understanding and picture of his life circumstances. And then, depending on the answers and his intent, understanding of the situation and commitment, we proceed to a more in-depth chain of questions.  We continue with a series of prepared questions we ask to immediately begin building his testimony for him.
 
When we listen to him and converse or dialog developing his testimony, we piece together the information to build his case. What we have discovered is usually he is now wrestling with an intense emotional issue and just wants a qualified person to listen to him. He also wants to know if he is worried about nothing or facing a matter for serious consideration. “Will it just go away if I ignore it?  What do I do to put this to rest?”  He has more questions than answers and is looking for answers, something to make sense out of the nightmare he woke up in.
 
The man is seeking guidance and instruction on how to approach a very delicate issue in his life that is presently beyond his wildest imagination. He has put his heart and trust into this relationship and is now stunned and shocked with a vague and uneasy feeling that something isn’t right.
 
We understand his desire to tell us his story with the lingering hope that we’ll just tell him not to worry. That everything is okay and he’ll feel better in the morning just having talked to us. But we know through our experience and training that the only remedy is the truth, which is that hard, factual proof establishing or excluding his paternal rights. He wants proof.

Our case administrators are trained and experienced in putting together a cohesive and comprehensive outline from which to work. We start establishing the facts of his testimony by asking deliberate and pointed questions to determine where he is currently mentally, emotionally and physically so we can proceed with case strategy to answer his questions. We discuss with him the type of proof he needs such as DNA testing evidence. We propose and offer a well thought out and tailored approach to exactly fit his needs.
 
The primary and overruling question revolves around his attitude and willingness to work with two foundational points.

1. Before a Court can issue any Orders regarding the paternity, care, custody, support or visitation of a minor child, the Court must have proof that the father is or is not, in fact, the father of the minor child.

2. The procedures and rulings of the court are defined by case law and statutes the judge must follow. Non legal definitions of, or arguments on any other issues are legally irrelevant and may cause you to lose your case. R U Daddy teaches and educates you to know and apply your legal rights, not what an interested party or someone else thinks they should be!

We then teach, educate and prepare you to represent yourself without the benefit of an attorney, which is known as a Pro Per or Pro Se litigant. As a pro se litigant, you enjoy every right under the law. However, pro se litigants are expected to follow and abide by the rules that govern the practice of law in the court room.

Glenn: Many of the people who work in the paternity field were themselves impacted by paternity fraud in one way or another. How did you get interested in this field?
 
Eric: As a matter of fact, a friend of mine found himself in this very situation and I started out by helping him. After speaking with him, I found that he had spent many thousands of dollars hiring attorneys who did little and knew nothing about paternity issues. In setting about to help him, I discovered that many of the fathers tested discover that they were not the biological father of the child they thought was theirs. I also found that once we established paternity through DNA testing, there was no bridge between the test and petitioning the court for a hearing. In other words, even when people had the test results, they didn’t know what to do with them.

We began asking questions and researching the answers to solve our problem and then make our information available to help others.

A Legal Advocate for Fathers in Los Angeles & Ventura Counties
The Law Offices of Adam Michael Sacks, Esq. handles cases of all sizes with compassion, understanding, and a commitment to help fathers protect themselves in a divorce. Don’t assume anything and don’t sign anything–call Adam Sacks, Esq. at 1-800-340-7320, or write him at adam@adamlawyer.com. www.adamlawyer.com (No relation)
15 views

  • mruffolo

    “Three former Duke lacrosse players falsely accused of rape filed a federal civil lawsuit Friday, seeking an unspecified amount in punitive and compensatory damages, as well as numerous reforms to the way the Durham Police Department handles criminal investigations.”

    http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1896692/

    Men fighting against the feminist government. Missing is the lying woman who initiated the injustice.

  • JohnG

    What I can’t figure out is how you can possibly insist that somebody pay child support for a child that isn’t theirs.

    I mean, you can’t put somebody in jail for bank robbery when it is obvious beyond the shadow of a doubt that they didn’t rob the bank.

    And while I’ve heard “best interest of the child” as a reason, by the same logic, you could take any orphan and arbitrarily “assign” it to somebody.

    Is this just a matter of somebody not getting a lawyer to run this through system to Supreme Court if needs be?






Search