‘Presumed father’ issue

The paternity law in Kansas (and Missouri) is archaic and definitely needs to be changed. A married man is automatically presumed to be the father of a child born during a marriage. Not in this day and age of DNA testing.

The soldier in Kansas is being punished for his wife’s infidelity (1/22, Local, “Bill aims to fix ‘presumed father’ issue; Under current Kansas law, an ex-husband must pay support even if the children are not his”). How can it possibly be in the best interest of any child that women, with the state’s assistance, can perpetuate this type of malicious prosecution against innocent men?

If this were a criminal case, it would be dismissed based on the lack of evidence. How can it be in a child’s best interest to never know who his or her father really is, and not even look for him? Or does the truth not really matter? All children should be DNA tested at birth, thus eliminating the need for cases such as this.

This law is permitting the state, with the backing of the courts, to commit fraud. This is legal extortion.

Ann Quinn
Kansas City

Comments

[Ann]

When I wrote that dna should be collected on all babies, it wasn't to suggest that all wives commit adultery. Although statistics say that 60% of spouses do cheat. Further, women are just as likely to cheat as men. It was so that dna could be collected for possible paternity testing, should the need arise. Men have only 3 years to contest paternity. By having the dna sample on hand it would just make it a lot easier for all involved. Routine tests and blood samples are taken from babies immediately after birth, this could just be one more. After 3 years, a man has no recourse. He is the father, regardless what dna says.

Why would it be offensive to have a dna swab taken? Who could be offended by the truth?

[Beasley Chadwick]

The Missouri Senate now has SB141 (The 2009 Missouri Paternity Reform Bill) scheduled for a committee hearing on Feb 2, 2009. This is great news in that previous efforts have failed to get even this far (one previous effort was scheduled, then pulled from the schedule in 2008).

The Missouri Senate General Laws Committee meets on Feb 3, 2009 to discuss the proposed reform of Missouri Paternity Laws.

The Members of the Committee are:

* Jack Goodman, 29th, Chairman
* Scott Rupp, 2nd, Vice-Chairman
* Dan Clemens, 20th
* Delbert Scott, 28th
* Carl Vogel, 6th
* Ryan McKenna, 22nd
* Yvonne Wilson, 9th

The current bill summary state:

“SB 141 - This act provides that a petitioner may at any time file a petition to challenge entry of a judgment of paternity and child support upon filing an affidavit stating that evidence exists which was not considered before entry of judgment. Such petition shall also include either an allegation that genetic testing was conducted within the past 90 days using DNA methodology, was performed by an expert, and that the test results indicate a 99% or greater probability that the petitioner is not the child’s father or a request to the court for an order of genetic paternity testing using DNA methodology. The court, after a hearing where all interested parties have been given an opportunity to present evidence and be heard and upon a finding of probable cause to believe the testing may result in a determination of non-paternity, may order the relevant parties to submit to genetic paternity testing. The petitioner shall pay for the costs of testing.

The court shall grant relief and enter judgment setting aside the previous judgment of paternity and child support, including a previous acknowledgment of paternity, extinguish any existing child support arrearage, and order the Department of Health and Senior Services to modify the child’s birth certificate accordingly upon a finding that the genetic test was properly conducted, accurate, and indicates a 99% or greater probability that the petitioner is not the child’s father. The provisions of this act shall not apply to grant relief to the parent of any adopted child.”

http://www.maketherealdadpay.org - Missouri Paternity Reform

[solomon]

Good evening Engineer,

This one is like T-ball. Its just a shame NE is off in his s-10 measuring the curvature on lumps of coal today.

[Engineer]

It's nice to come onto a thread where ypu agree with all the remarks concerning the letters.

[Pub 17]

Solomon-
THAT'S WHY I COME TO THESE RIDICULOUS BLOGS. Before the Internet I was the proud owner of a copy of High Weirdness By Mail, and worked through at least half the lunatics in the book. I still have my treasured copy of Building A Whiter and Brighter World, for instance.
Now there's so many headcases with websites, I need some sorting out done by the inmates. It's like picking up books at random on the back tables at a university library--absolutely fascinating what people will voluntarily put into their heads.

[solomon]

My darling Kate,

I could not agree more, trust is what makes marriages work.

[Kate]

What happened to the young man in the referenced article was ridiculous. But so is the letter-writer’s suggestion that ALL babies receive paternity tests at birth. How offensive is it for the law to presume that all married women sleep around unless they prove otherwise.

[T. Hanson]

Say his name 3 times....

[CRD]

Like Jack, I came here looking for our resident nutcase to go flying off the handle about his ex-wife. Hmm. No dice.

[solomon]

Good morning jack(louie) and Marctnts,

Looks like we all had the same thought on this one.

To me its a no brainer, whether ot not a person is married to a woman at the time of birth if the child is not his then the burden should be on the mother.

Its easy as pie to love a child that is not your biological one, my oldest son came into my life when he was 8. It must be hard as heck to pay 18 yrs though for a child not yours and if the relationship with the mother has OR has not ended.

[Marctnts]

Jack, my thoughts exactly.

I have always thought the "presumed father" laws were rather odd, and I always took them as an easy way for a lazy government to make sure that SOMEONE is on the hook.

[jack]

Wow, this should set NoMo off.