This week's Couples Court case is right at the edge of Judge Michele Mathews' jurisdiction, but she's agreed to take it on.

It involves a familiar subject that's behind a lot of ugly arguments: Child support. In this case another court has already issued a ruling, but the plaintiff is making an appeal.

Let's proceed ...

Dear Rik and Michele:

Please help! I've been ordered to pay child support for a baby that is not mine. I married my high school girlfriend after she got pregnant, and she gave birth to a baby boy. Sadly, though, our marriage soon fell apart.

After I moved to Washington, my former wife began asking me for child support. I contributed what I could for awhile, but when the boy was 3 years old, I decided to take a paternity test.

The test confirmed that I'm not the father, so I told my ex that I wouldn't pay anymore. She responded by taking me to court in her home state of Oklahoma.

Guess what? Even though I'm definitely not the father, the judge ruled that I'm STILL responsible for child support because under Oklahoma law, men must question paternity within two years of a child's birth.

This seems unfair and wrong to me, so I'm appealing to you: Do you think I should be held responsible for this little boy, even though he isn't mine and I've barely even seen him?

Whoa! That's a tough one!

What do you think, Bull Pen jurors? Should he have to pay child support or not?

More From 92.9 The Bull