FLINT, Mich. — The state of Michigan is giving a father a choice: pay the medical cost of his daughter's birth or marry the girl's mother.

Gary Johnson was billed $3,800 for the birth of his daughter JaeLyn, The Flint Journal reported in Sunday online editions. Johnson is not married to the child's mother, Rebecca Witt.

The Michigan Legislature amended the state's paternity act five years ago to waive birthing costs for a father, if he married the child's mother. A year later, Witt gave birth to JaeLyn. The state paid for the hospital costs because Witt was on Medicaid at the time and is now trying to recover the money.

Jack Battles, the Genesee County Friend of the Court, said the law is an incentive to maintain the sanctity of marriage.

"It's totally up to them," said Battles, whose office enforces paternity rulings, child support and other aspects of family law. Until Johnson can produce a marriage license, "they have to pay."

Johnson and Witt said they want to marry eventually, but Witt said she wants her marriage date to be her choice.

"I don't think anybody should tell me when to get married," said Witt. "I would like to have a nice wedding, and I can wait for it."

Witt and Johnson said they have been struggling since the state started coming after Johnson for the hospital costs. Johnson said he was told he would be billed $500 a month and planned to meet with a caseworker to work out a solution.

"Losing just $10 hurts us," said Johnson, who makes $8 an hour at a Grand Blanc-area nursery. "We don't have a car, we don't even have an oven."

Johnson said he understood the state wants to promote marriage for parents but he respects Witt's position. "It's a woman's dream to have the best wedding she can have," he said.

Credit:

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20090119/Marry.or.Pay/

I feel bad for this family. Much more the guy who is being told he either pays one bill or pays to get married. Yet alone he can't affored either.

I don't know if he is able to work more then one job or not, but if I was in his shoes and I could.. I would try my best to get a second job to help out.. dunno.

However I don't feel a state should butt in and make this man pay to get married or his medial bills he can't even affored.

Instead they should be helping this guy out.. is all I'm getting at.

This is pretty sad news and I thought I would post it.

Worse of all.. his family doesn't even have an oven or a car.

maybe he should say he wanted an abortion

then that would open a whole new legal issue

Maybe.

the state had a good idea, but it needs better implementation, if they are living together as married then it should be waived particularly if the mother could have qualified for Medicaid with or without the marriage license

True, I agree with you.

I think it's wrong for the state to bring the choice of getting married into the picture.

Yeah I also think it's wrong for the state to do that. But they probably just do not want any more dead beat dad's around then they already have.. whatever the case maybe they shouldn't force something like married on a couple who can't even affored an oven or a car etc.

Oh, I definitely see the message that they are sending. I do think they crossed the line, though.

Perhaps, if they can't afford a car, oven or the medical bills for the child, they shouldn't have had it. Why should the state have to pay for their irresponsibility? Just saying

Yeah.. I totally agree with you on that.

These type of things happen all of the time. Even to teenagers too who are not married or dating very long etc. People make dumb moves but one thing leads to another and it happens.

No the state shouldn't have to pay for the two being irresponsibilitys, however the state shouldn't force them into getting married even though they have planned on getting married etc, besides the state should help them with there bills if they can't affored it.

That's what the goverment is here for, not so much the state though and besides there could be so much more to this story then me and you or any body else knows about.

Johncenawlife316 said:
Yeah I also think it's wrong for the state to do that. But they probably just do not want any more dead beat dad's around then they already have.. whatever the case maybe they shouldn't force something like married on a couple who can't even affored an oven or a car etc.

Or dead beat moms. It does go both ways.

so forced abortion is in order????????

after all either they are babies or they are not right???????


after all maybe they used birth control that failed

why dont they claim common law marriage.
the state goes away, and they can have a ceremony when they choose too!!!

bc failure is quite common

I AM CONFUSED ,IS SHE HAVING TO PAY FOR ANY OF THIS BILL?IT SOUNDS LIKE HE IS BEING BILLED AND SHE INSNT RESPONSIBLE.MAYBE I READ IT WRONG

They don't have common law marriage in Missouri, btw.

I'm certainly not saying anything about abortion, forced or otherwise. But, why should they expect the state to pay? If you can't afford a child, don't have sex, it's the only foolproof way not to get pregnant. Anything else is irresponsible. If you do get pregnant, intentionally or otherwise, then figure out a way to pay for it. I pay for my own, as do most people, and I never wanted or expected anyone else to pay for anything.

They should not be forced into marriage, of course, that's simply not a good solution to the problem either. They're forced into marriage to avoid a bill they can't afford then they become yet another statistic? That's not right either.

does that mean ya want me to move in with ya???

I don't even know what you look like.