A controversial ruling from the Michigan Court of Appeals. The jist of the case:

Alexander R. Shire, now 29, was allegedly 14 years old when lured into sexual relations in with Laura Michelle Evelyn, then 21. When she and her husband, David Evelyn, got divorced testing determined that the child she bore in 1989 was Shire's. The ruling indicates Shire must pay child support, even though he was under age and claims he didn't consent to sex.

Question: if it had been a 14 year old girl who had been molested and become pregnant, would the court have: 1) allowed the perpetrator to obtain custody of the infant born fromt he molestation, and 2) awarded him child support?

What if the case had been brought right after the birth? Would we require the 15 year old to get a paper route to pay this adult child support support?

Does the juvenile court balance the best interests of the 15-year-old child against the best interests of the newborn child? Technically both are children and both are innocent of wrongdoing.

The possibilities are interesting.

I note in reading the opinion that any other precedent cited all involve underage males, not my hypothetical above. But the law is always changing. . .

Update: I should mention I saw it first on How Appealing.