Just a week after Michael Jordan celebrated his birthday, he was slapped with a paternity suit from a woman claiming that he is the father of her 16-year-old son. Pamela Y. Love, 48, claims that Jordan and her met in Chicago in the late 1980’s and the her son was the result of a 1995 encounter. Jordan was married to Juanita Vanoy, the mother of his three children, at the time.
Jordan quickly asked a Georgia court to dismiss a lawsuit filed against him saying that the father of the child has already been established. Jordan released a statement through his representatives saying, “Public records show that the paternity of the child was established in a prior case in this same court many years ago and that Michael Jordan is not the father. He also filed a counterclaim seeking sanctions for the false claims made against him. It is unfortunate that well-known figures are the target of these kind of claims. Michael Jordan will vigorously defend himself and his reputation.”
Michael’s supposed track record as a womanizer and a serial adulterer is well known, so the idea that he is the father of one of the women he had a relationship with is not that far fetched. The question as to why the woman waited 16 years to ask for a paternity test and child support remains.
The larger picture being painted is actually a sad one. If this is indeed a cheap attempt at extortion, then it shows the nature of humans and what they are willing to endure for a quick payday. Love picked a highly visible and significantly wealthy individual to seek payment from. Even crazier, Love’s son posted a video to Facebook claiming that Jordan was his father and that he wanted him to player a larger role in his life. Once again, this is all under the assumption that the claim is false, but either Love told a large lie to her son or her son is willingly participating. Neither of those scenarios paints a very glowing picture of the the Love household.
The largest red flags is the search for monetary compensation. Love had been married, so I am guessing that the child had been provided for in the past. And with just two years remaining before the child is legally an adult, the timing seems a bit odd. However, gaining even a percentage of Jordan’s income for the final two years would seem to be more than a substantial return for Love.
If the claim is true, then it continues to add to the stigma that professional athletes rarely take responsibilities for their actions. The boy just becomes another child that has grown-up without the benefit of having his father present in his life. If the child is indeed Jordan’s, then he has a responsibility to be a father to the child. As odd as it may be after 16 years, it is better to know your child and vise verca, than not at all.
The truth of this matter may never be solved, but I’m sure both parties would like the courts to rule in their favor. However, the truth that this is indeed a sad situation remains.