As often as we all say that our legal system is broken, this judge's recent court decision may reinstate our faith in it.

In November, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that an unwed father must pay back Medicaid for at least 50% of the birthing expenses, according to Indiana statute. Doing so does not violate the father's rights, as he tried to argue unsuccessfully.

The father of the child argued "that I.C. § 31-14-17-1 violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution because it requires the father of a child born out-of-wedlock to reimburse the infant's birthing expenses to Medicaid while no similar obligation exists for a married father." (Can you believe he tries to shirk responsibility by using the U.S. Constitution?!)

But it gets even more ridiculous with this excerpt from the case:

"Meneses now claims that he is treated differently from married fathers in that only fathers with children born out-of-wedlock are held responsible for fifty percent of the child's birthing expenses. See I.C. § 31-14-17-1. If unmarried to the mother, a man has no legal obligation to provide any type of support on behalf of the child, until paternity is established; whereas, on the other hand, a familial support obligation is inherently associated with a marriage."

To these futile arguments, the judge wrote in her opinion that requiring men to provide for children born out of wedlock and reimburse medical expenses is a legitimate goal because it requires a man to accept financial responsibility similar to what married men do voluntarily.

For the whole published opinion, please see:

http://www.state.in.us/judiciary/opinion...