An attorney is pitted against a judge in a child support case, as the judge claims that he is not the father of the attorney's two children, though the children were both born during the couple's 19 year-long relationship and the judge signed affidavits of paternity, as reported by Michigan Live.
Attorney D.K. claims that Judge A.H. is the biological father of at least one of her two children and that she had no other sexual partners during their relationship. D.F. is now suing A.H. for child support and damages.
D.K. previously stated that neither of her children were born following in vitro fertilization – but never offered the information that her 13 year-old-daughter was due to artificial insemination.
D.K. told reporters that since J.H. signed an affidavit of paternity a year ago he is obliged to be responsible for both her 13 year-old daughter and her six year-old son.
According to D.K., J.H. is the biological father of her son.
On October 1 D.K. filed a motion that stated that in 2009 J.H. had named their son as the primary beneficiary to his life insurance policy.
Attorney Jack Belzer, in representing J.H. ,said that his client only signed the affidavits because he had been "led him to believe they were his (children)" by D.K.
Belzer explained that his client only "took her at her word. He wanted to do the right thing."
Now that D.K. has admitted to have been artificially inseminated, Belzer said that it served to substantiate "what we've been saying" and that he was "real confident at least one of the children is going to turn out not to be his biological child."
Belzer said that his client believed that both of the children were his. Belzer now wants D.K. to have DNA testing to prove if his client is indeed the father of either child.
However, D.K. is arguing that J.H. "knew from the get-go how (her daughter) got here" – insinuating that J.H. knew that he was not the girl's biological father.
The affidavits of parentage were signed, for each child, in 2011. The reason for the affidavits was so that J.H. could put the children under his name for county health care benefits.
In the initial Circuit Court complaint there is no notation that D.K. admitted to artificial insemination in her daughter's birth. Rather, D.K. claims that reporters never asked about artificial insemination, they only asked if she had her daughter via in vitro.
Furthermore, D.K. claims to have never met the sperm donor, she only learned what she needed before choosing him by looking at his general profile.
Now that reporters have been made aware that D.K. had artificial insemination she told them, "My body has never underwent an in vitro fertilization."
An Oakland County judge is due to hear the motions in early October.
If you have a complicated case of child support that you need sorted out, contact a family law attorney for help.