Paul H. Williams, Sunday Gleaner Writer
When Desmond's 'son', Roy, turned 18, Desmond decided it was time to leave him, his siblings and their mother. Roy was now an adult, and Desmond could no longer contain his anger every time he looked at the boy, who bore a striking resemblance to Mr. Mac, a well-known businessman in their community. The wide gap between their front teeth was the clincher. So, he left to pick up the pieces of his shattered life, part of which was spent fathering a child who was not his.
The foregoing story has been told many times over with different names and circumstances, but the same story line. It's fictitious, but it mirrors many real-life situations. Even great men of history have been known to father the children of other men, sometimes knowingly, but obligatorily. In certain countries, the U.S.A. significantly, such a situation has developed into a legal phenomenon called 'paternity fraud', mostly committed by women.
A fraud is a deliberate false declaration and misrepresentation. 'Paternity fraud', therefore, is when a woman declares that a particular man is the father of her child, when she knows that the man isn't.
She knows that the man isn't the child's father, but she also knows that the man can support the child, and thus, the all-important economic reason why this act of deception is widespread. The mother gives the child to the man who has the best financial foundation. This act is not to be confused with the situation where the woman is just not sure who the father is, or that in which she may have mistakenly given the child to the wrong father.
A common element of the fraud is when the mother gets unscrupulous persons, pretending to be the child's father, to sign registration documents, This is usually done by the mother who is adamant that the child's 'father's' name must be on the birth certificate.
wrong 'puppa'
Locally, the child who is suspected to be given the wrong 'puppa' is called a 'jacket', whether it was done deliberately or by chance. But, how did we come by the moniker? Well, a jacket is supposed to fit well, snugly. And that is the crux of the matter. In many cases, the Jacket fits his father perfectly, no spot-on resemblance, but at the same time, no red flag. You cannot tell it isn't his. So the father goes around parading in his 'sartorial' splendour. Fate has been a good tailor.
In other cases, the Jacket does not fit. The difference between 'father' and 'child' equals that between night and day. Most times, the Jacket and his 'father' are the only persons who don't know that he's a Jacket. Scandal in the family!
One major explanation for the physical and behavioural differences between father and child is the biological phenomenon called atavism, also known as throwback. This is a situation in which the child looks nothing like its parents, but closely resembles distant relatives. It is real, but when it is used to cover the truth, then it is deception, especially when the father has never seen, and perhaps never will see, these distant relatives. But, why do most of these 'fathers' fail to recognise that something is awry?
Men accept ownership because they trust their spouses, and this, therefore, is the basis of the deception. They accept because there is no reason to doubt their paternity.
easy prey
Because, while the woman pulls the man into her web of deceit, it is the man who should be alerted to the possibility of being named the father of a child that is not his. The man who is anxious to be called 'baby father' is easy prey. The world must know that he's a daddy and so whenever he's informed of the child's existence, he gladly beats his chest. There are even cases where men who went around boasting of their huge number of offspring found out late in life that they were infertile, and had always been.
The discovery of the deception might be by design or accident. There are horror stories unlimited of how some men discovered that they were not their children's biological father because of medical issues. It might be as a result of a test to match blood type or deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) for blood transfusion, or bone marrow transplant procedures. Or, it may be a test for immigration or paternity matters.
jumped ship
Before the use of DNA tests in Jamaica, the court usually ordered a blood test to determine paternity. The purpose of the test was to exclude the father. It was a simple test that matched the parents' blood type. Many times, the results were inconclusive, but the judge ordered the purported father to support the child or to continue to support the child, having been convinced by the mother that the man in question was her only one, and if the man admitted to have copulated with her during the time when she got pregnant. This didn't go down well with some men, and so they jumped ship.
The DNA test is now the preferred way to prove or disprove paternity, and it can be very costly. The Government subsidises the cost if the test is done through the Family Court. In many cases, the losing party is ordered by the judge to pay for the test, which is done at the Government Forensic Laboratory. The test can also be done at Caribbean Genetics, located at the University of the West Indies, Mona campus.
There is no specific law in Jamaica that speaks to paternity fraud, but legal experts say a fraud is a fraud, and the onus therefore would be on the man to prove in a court of law that the woman deliberately named him the father - when she knew he wasn't - for financial gains, and other reasons. Also, the research is yet to find any such case brought before the Jamaican courts, despite widespread stories of the wrongful assignation of children to their 'fathers'.
paul.williams@gleanerjm.com
