Hi,<BR>Can anyone help me find out if in Ohio when baby is conceived out of marriage and OW is married to someone else if it is considered her H child?<P>I found a few Ohio divorce laws but not able to "search" that question.<P>I don't know how to look. Help.<P>------------------<BR>Imagine....

gemini1:<P>In general, a child born in a marriage is considered the product of that marriage (I'm not sure about Ohio).<P>However, if the OW's husband knew that the child wasn't his, he could establish that through paternity testing. He could then be relieved of financial responsibility for that child (through a divorce).<P>If this happened, the OW could then turn and sue your husband, to establish paternity in an attempt to collect child support.

Check this site out for the Ohio Code.<P>http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishin...p;GRStructure1=3111&GRStructure2=%20<P>Well, I don't know why that didn't come through as a link, as I copied/pasted from the address bar, but anyway, here is what it says (if you can't find it).<P>From the Ohio Revised Code:<P> § 3111.03 Presumption of paternity. <BR>Text of Statute<P>(A) A man is presumed to be the natural father of a child under any of the following circumstances:<P><BR>(1) The man and the child's mother are or have been married to each other, and the child is born during the marriage or is born within three hundred days after the marriage is terminated by death, annulment, divorce, or dissolution or after the man and the child's mother separate pursuant to a separation agreement.<P>(2) The man and the child's mother attempted, before the child's birth, to marry each other by a marriage that was solemnized in apparent compliance with the law of the state in which the marriage took place, the marriage is or could be declared invalid, and either of the following applies:<P>(a) The marriage can only be declared invalid by a court and the child is born during the marriage or within three hundred days after the termination of the marriage by death, annulment, divorce, or dissolution;<P>(b) The attempted marriage is invalid without a court order and the child is born within three hundred days after the termination of cohabitation.<BR>(3) The man and the child's mother, after the child's birth, married or attempted to marry each other by a marriage solemnized in apparent compliance with the law of the state in which the marriage took place, and either of the following occurs:<P><BR>(a) The man has acknowledged his paternity of the child in a writing sworn to before a notary public;<P>(b) The man is required to support the child by a written voluntary promise or by a court order.<P>(4) An acknowledgment of paternity filed with the division of child support in the department of job and family services becomes final pursuant to section 2151.232 [2151.23.2], 3111.211 [3111.21.1], or 5101.314 [5101.31.4] of the Revised Code.<P>(5) A court or administrative body, pursuant to section 3111.09, 3111.22, or 3115.52 of the Revised Code or otherwise, has ordered that genetic tests be conducted or the natural mother and alleged natural father voluntarily agreed to genetic testing pursuant to former section 3111.21 of the Revised Code to determine the father and child relationship and the results of the genetic tests indicate a probability of ninety-nine per cent or greater that the man is the biological father of the child.<BR>(B)(1) A presumption arises under division (A)(3) of this section regardless of the validity or invalidity of the marriage of the parents. A presumption that arises under this section can only be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence that includes the results of genetic testing, except that a presumption that arises under division (A)(1) or (2) of this section is conclusive as provided in division (A) of section 3111.37 of the Revised Code and cannot be rebutted. If two or more conflicting presumptions arise under this section, the court shall determine, based upon logic and policy considerations, which presumption controls. If a determination described in division (B)(3) of this section conflicts with a presumption that arises under this section the determination is controlling.<P><BR>(2) Notwithstanding division (B)(1) of this section, a presumption that arises under division (A)(4) of this section may only be rebutted as provided in division (B)(2) of section 5101.314 [5101.31.4] of the Revised Code.<BR>(3) Notwithstanding division (A)(5) of this section, a final and enforceable determination finding the existence of a father and child relationship pursuant to former section 3111.21 or section 3111.22 of the Revised Code that is based on the results of genetic tests ordered pursuant to either of those sections, is not a presumption.<P><BR>(C) A presumption of paternity that arose pursuant to this section prior to January 1, 1998, shall remain valid on and after that date unless rebutted pursuant to division (B) of this section. This division does not apply to a determination described in division (B)(3) of this section.<BR>History<P>HISTORY: 139 v H 245 (Eff 6-29-82); 141 v H 476 (Eff 9-24-86); 142 v H 790 (Eff 3-16-89); 143 v S 3 (Eff 4-11-91); 144 v S 10 (Eff 7-15-92); 147 v H 352 (Eff 1-1-98); 148 v H 471. Eff 7-1-2000.<P><BR>Not analogous to former RC § 3111.03 (RS § 5637; S&C 177; 70 v 112, § 3; GC § 8006-3; 110 v 296; 124 v 178(197); Bureau of Code Revision, 10-1-53), repealed 139 v H 245, § 2, eff 6-29-82.<P><BR>The effective date is set by section 12(A) of HB 471.<p>[This message has been edited by Sweetpea (edited November 30, 2000).]

<BR>gemini1,<P>Ohio Revised Code 3111.03 codifies the Ohio presumption of paternity. This is a hideous URL, but cutting and pasting should work:<BR> <A HREF="http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishing.com/revisedcode/home3.cfm?GRDescription1=revised%20code&GRDescription2=title%2031&GRDescription3=%20&TextField=%3CJD%3A%223111%22%3ECHAPTER%203" TARGET=_blank>http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishing.com/revisedcode/home3.cfm?GRDescription1=revised%20code&GRDescription2=title%2031&GRDescription3=%20&TextField=%3CJD%3A%223111%22%3ECHAPTER%203</A> 111%3A%20PARENTAGE&GRStructure1=3111&GRStructure2=%20<P>The relevant text is as follows:<P> <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>§ 3111.03 Presumption of paternity. <P>Text of Statute<P>(A) A man is presumed to be the natural father of a child under any of the following circumstances:<P>(1) The man and the child's mother are or have been married to each other, and the child is born during the marriage or is born within three hundred days after the marriage is terminated by death, annulment, divorce, or dissolution or after the man and the child's mother separate pursuant to a separation agreement.<P>(2) The man and the child's mother attempted, before the child's birth, to marry each other by a marriage that was solemnized in apparent compliance with the law of the state in which the marriage took place, the marriage is or could be declared invalid, and either of the following applies:<P>(a) The marriage can only be declared invalid by a court and the child is born during the marriage or within three hundred days after the termination of the marriage by death, annulment, divorce, or dissolution;<P>(b) The attempted marriage is invalid without a court order and the child is born within three hundred days after the termination of cohabitation.<P>(3) The man and the child's mother, after the child's birth, married or attempted to marry each other by a marriage solemnized in apparent compliance with the law of the state in which the marriage took place, and either of the following occurs:<P>(a) The man has acknowledged his paternity of the child in a writing sworn to before a notary public;<P>(b) The man is required to support the child by a written voluntary promise or by a court order.<P>(4) An acknowledgment of paternity filed with the division of child support in the department of job and family services becomes final pursuant to section 2151.232 [2151.23.2], 3111.211 [3111.21.1], or<BR>5101.314 [5101.31.4] of the Revised Code.<P>(5) A court or administrative body, pursuant to section 3111.09, 3111.22, or 3115.52 of the Revised Code or otherwise, has ordered that genetic tests be conducted or the natural mother and alleged natural father voluntarily agreed to genetic testing pursuant to former section 3111.21 of the Revised Code to determine the father and child relationship and the results of the genetic tests indicate a probability of ninety-nine per cent or greater that the man is the biological father of the child.<P>(B)(1) A presumption arises under division (A)(3) of this section regardless of the validity or invalidity of the marriage of the parents. A presumption that arises under this section can only be rebutted by clear<BR>and convincing evidence that includes the results of genetic testing, except that a presumption that arises under division (A)(1) or (2) of this section is conclusive as provided in division (A) of section<BR>3111.37 of the Revised Code and cannot be rebutted. If two or more conflicting presumptions arise under this section, the court shall determine, based upon logic and policy considerations, which presumption controls. If a determination described in division (B)(3) of this section conflicts with a presumption that arises under this section the determination is controlling.<P>(2) Notwithstanding division (B)(1) of this section, a presumption that arises under division (A)(4) of this section may only be rebutted as provided in division (B)(2) of section 5101.314 [5101.31.4] of the<BR>Revised Code.<P>(3) Notwithstanding division (A)(5) of this section, a final and enforceable determination finding the existence of a father and child relationship pursuant to former section 3111.21 or section 3111.22 of the Revised Code that is based on the results of genetic tests ordered pursuant to either of those sections, is not a presumption.<P>(C) A presumption of paternity that arose pursuant to this section prior to January 1, 1998, shall remain valid on and after that date unless rebutted pursuant to division (B) of this section. This division does<BR>not apply to a determination described in division (B)(3) of this section.<P>History<P>HISTORY: 139 v H 245 (Eff 6-29-82); 141 v H 476 (Eff 9-24-86); 142 v H 790 (Eff 3-16-89); 143 v S 3 (Eff 4-11-91); 144 v S 10 (Eff 7-15-92); 147 v H 352 (Eff 1-1-98); 148 v H 471. Eff 7-1-2000.<P>Not analogous to former RC § 3111.03 (RS § 5637; S&C 177; 70 v 112, § 3; GC § 8006-3; 110 v 296; 124v 178(197); Bureau of Code Revision, 10-1-53), repealed 139 v H 245, § 2, eff 6-29-82.<P>The effective date is set by section 12(A) of HB 471.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Where I disagree with K (sorry K, you're the man in here, but I gotta be accurate on this!) is when the OW's H has to rebut. Historically, the OW's H would have to litigate within the first two years of the child's life. After that, he was on the financial hook forever, even if he later learned that his child was fathered by someone else. This is, quite frankly, a morally sick state of affairs.<P>Credit Ohio for actually doing the right thing. Men who are decieved by their wives can litigate paternity at any age, which is exactly the way it should be in all 50 states. What I don't know is whether this applies in cases where the H knows about the paternity early on and decides not to litigate. The online stuff doesn't seem to have this latest law (which was only enacted within the last few months), so I can't answer that question.<P>My view is that the OW's H should *always* retain the ability to be held financially harmless for the child, yet he should retain all rights to fatherhood (including a presumption of 50% JPC/JLC). I'm not sure that's what Ohio has done, though.<P>Hope this helps,<P>Bystander

Bystander, looks like we've been following each other around!

<BR>Hi Sweetpea!<P>LOL. Yep, that's a good website, n'est-ce pas? <P>Bystander

Hey Bystander, no need to apologize... I was just winging it! Glad to see that you showed up with the facts.

Hey,K, Sweetpea & Bystander,<BR>Thanks for info,I was just curious.I didn't know how to navigate through laws.<BR>My H plans to take full responsibility if paternity shows him to be father.<P>I wondered bcuz her H wants to raise oc as his own. She filed for dissolution.But she may change her mind.<P>When I copied address from Bystander and pasted it...Well it says..Dracula X for Turbo duo-PC engine CD import....lol thought it was strange.<P>Thanks again to all of you who helped.<P>------------------<BR>Imagine....<p>[This message has been edited by gemini1 (edited November 30, 2000).]