“Father also points out the steps he took to prepare for fatherhood. For example, he notes he was paying down his debt, and he acquired baby items for his home. But Father did these things for his own benefit, not Mother’s, and they conferred no benefit on her.”
Conversely, the referenced steps were for their daughter’s benefit. Focusing on the child—as the circumstances had surely endorsed—is likewise supportive to the mother. The legislative intent is to provide “a measure by which to gauge a father’s commitment to his child during pregnancy,” after all.
In re Adoption of D.M.M., 955 P.2d 618, 622 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).
“Granted, Father sent texts expressing concern for Mother and the child. For example, Father points out an instance when he texted Mother, ‘With this heat if you need to go somewhere and it’s too hot, I will come get you and take you because we need you to not be too hot.’ Another time, Father asked Mother if she would be safe if a tornado hit near where she was. While these texts show concern, it is questionable whether they amount to significant nonmonetary assistance, as required by statute. On top of that, Father also sent many text messages that Mother found upsetting and hurtful. Mother’s testimony, as well as her texts to Father, showed she found his texting to be very stressful overall.”
Easily detectable, her testimony was almost entirely perjurious. K.S.A. 44-1039.
“As for Mother’s interference, Father claims Mother refused much of the support he offered. Granted, Mother did decline to take Father up on some of his offers. On at least one or two occasions, Mother also told Father that she did not want or need anything from him. But Mother did accept other offers of support, such as his offer to pay her phone bill or give her gas money. The record shows Mother had significant financial difficulties over the course of her pregnancy, particularly regarding housing and transportation. Father never offered to help her cover rent to keep from being evicted or to help her pay for car repairs. The offers he made that Mother rejected were often for incidental support, such as an Uber ride or some ramen.”
Her boyfriend’s testimony, “Did you charge her rent when she moved in with you?” “No.” “She had free housing anytime she was living with you?” “Basically.” “Did she pay any bills, anything like that?” “No, not really.”
A mother’s needs are a relevant circumstance in determining whether a father acted reasonably to provide support.
In re of the Adoption of M.D.K., 58 P.3d 745, 749 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002).
Giving a mother money for her own discretionary use—completely unrelated to a pregnancy—does not equate to a father providing support for that pregnancy. Sensibly, accepting some support does not somehow annul support that was refused.
“The evidence does show Father planned to parent Baby Girl G. and did things to prepare for fatherhood. But under Kansas law, an unwed father has a specific duty to affirmatively provide support, particularly financial support, to the mother during the last six months of the pregnancy to ensure his parental rights.”
“For the purposes of this subsection, ‘support’ means monetary or non-monetary assistance that is reflected in specific and significant acts and sustained over the applicable period.”
K.S.A. 59-2136(h)(4) does not state nor imply “particularly financial support.” It is an elementary principle of statutory construction that all the words of a statute must be given effect.
In re Adoption of B.M.W., 268 Kan. 871, 883 (Kan. 2000).
“Father provided her a ride home from her appointment to enroll, but he did not give her a ride there.”
He did not fail to provide her with support because she chose to arrive at an appointment with someone else.
“As for Father’s offer to allow Mother to store her belongings at his home, she never took him up on this offer.”
A mother’s refusal of support is to factor in determining if the father provided adequate support.
In re Adoption of Baby Boy B., 254 Kan. 454, 465 (Kan. 1994).
She had refused or ignored most of the support that he offered. For example, on July 1, “I have told you one hundred times I do not need nor want anything from you.” On July 9, he stated, “Let me know if you need money,” to no response. And on July 25, she said, “I don’t want your help!”
“He spent hundreds of dollars on credit card payments and withdrew hundreds of dollars in cash. He also had some money left over at the end of each month, though perhaps not much.”
Consumers are contractually liable to repay all debts arising on a credit account by reason of an agreement to that effect, and testimony shows that most withdrawn funds were for financial obligations. The adoption accounting shows that the mother had received compensation for “reasonable living expenses.” She had no living expenses from May through September; therefore, this payment was illegal. K.S.A. 59-2121(c).
