Have a question about establishing paternity. For those that don't know my story, OW was married but separated when she got preg by my H. Child is now 1 1/2, lives in CA. OW is still married but getting divorced. No DNA test done yet - my H seems positive it is his (they only had sex once without a condom, she got preg, had baby exactly 9 months later, looks just like my H, etc). My H has been sending her $ by verbal agreement - money order - is there any record of that? Only her name is on the Birth Cert - no father is listed. I know that if someone is M, usually paternity is assumed to be the H - but since she left BC blank what does that mean? Is her H off the hook? I know sending $ can be considered a presumption of paternity and my H should stop - can money orders be traced? My H did see a lawyer in CA and he was not helpful, but said she could come after him anytime for paternity - is that true? The blank BC bothers me. Anyone who knows anything about CA law - any advice would be appreciated.

forth, CA is simular to my state. First of all you can look it up on line and find alot of info there. If you start with the welfare office it should have links to the state laws for paternity. Anyway....I am married but seperated. The law states here that at time of conceiption legal husband is assumed the father unless........I mean unless.....an affavidated of paternity is signed. A voluntary one that is. Or H and W sign a letter legal document stating the H is not the father and yet the court can and will make your husband take a paternity test proving he is or is not the father. As far as the money orders goes....they can be traced. The numbers on them. Also, she could be making copies of them monthly. He's already paying support. Apparently she does not want anything from him. I would have the dna test done just to protect ALL parties involved. Also, a avaidated can be filed to change the birth cirt. I think because she was married though and it's been a while that she would have to have the dna test done before it can be changed. I'd start snooping on the internet to see what your laws are. Also see an attorney. It could not hurt.
Mary

The husband will be liable and presumed the father because of the marriage, unless it is contested or dna done before the child is 2 years old, otherwise her husband will be legally the childs father and responsible for life once the child turns two.

that is why pops was in a rush that i do dna tests, so that no matter what happened with us, grace would be legally taken care of by her bio dad, not pops

my daughters birth certificate is blank for the father also. it is up to her bio dad to change that if he wants to be on it, but leaving it blank doesnt prove that her husband or yours is not the father

STOP SENDING THIS WOMAN MONEY. Do you have contact with the oc? If so,do this legally.

Your husband is paying cs for a one night stand? NO WAY. YOU STOP UNTIL YOU KNOW.

Do this legally. Get the tests.

OK Thanks for the replies but I am still confused.
LynnG - A was not a one night stand - 1 1/2 yrs of dinners, calls, etc leading to 6-8 months of full blown physical affair then preg. H has been sending her $ to keep her appeased until our situation is more sttled - probably not a good idea but he is scared of what she will get in CS. No, we have no contact with OC right now but H doesn't know what he wants. OW is starting to get more irrational, angry, etc. I went to court and filed for CS/Spousal support this past Mon - have an appt in one week to set up CS for ME. HOpefully this will at least alleviate our $ worries. AS soon as he stops sending $, he is sure she will go to a lawyer. That is why I'm concerned about paternity. Is there any benefit in holding off? After a certain time, will her H be considered the father? What if they are divoreced before child is 2?

Full House - Can you read my ?'s above? Also,what if the H signed something in the H at the time of birth stating that he isn't the father of this child. Wouldn't he have to do this to keep his name off the BC? The child doesn't have his last name either - has mothers maiden name for last name. I looked up what I could find on paternity law in CA, actually everywhere, and it looks like a bio father only has until age 2 to claim that he is the father, but a mother has no time limitations on when she can name the father. Is that true? Do you think her H would be considered the father even if they were divorced when child is 2? It seems like basically she has the right to come after my H anytime she wants and claim he is the father, request Dna and CS - is that right?
That doesn't make sense - if you know who the father is and where he is shouldn't there be some time limit to go after him for $?

IN CALIFORNIA THE HUSBAND IS PRESUMED THE FATHER OF THE CHILD, IF HER HUSBAND DOESNT DO ANYTHING TO PROVE HE IS NOT THE FATHER BEFORE THE CHILD TURNS 2, HE WILL BE LEGALLY AND FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS CHILD, IT DOESNT MATTER IF IT IS NOT HIS BIOLOGICALLY. ONCE THE TIME LIMIT IS UP, THE CHILD IS HIS IN THE STATES EYES. DOESNT MATTER THAT THEY WERE SEPERATED OR FILING FOR DIVORCE, THE CHILD WAS CONCEIVED DURING THEIR MARRIAGE. MY LAWYER TOLD ME THAT I HAD UP TO THE AGE OF 2, AND THAT WAS IT. YOU CAN PROVE WHO THE FATHER IS AFTER THAT, BUT IT DOESNT CHANGE ANYTHING. SO IF YOU HAVENT DONE ANY DNA, YOU SHOULDNT BE PAYING ANY MONEY, AND YOU ARE SMART TO HOLD OFF UNTIL YOU GET YOUR CS, BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, IF YOU STOP PAYING NOW IT MAY CAUSE HER TO TRY TO DO SOMETHING LEGALLY TO GET MONEY, SO GET YOUR CS SQUARED AWAY FOR YOUR PROTECTION, THAN STOP ANYTHING GOING TO HER. I GATHER HER HUSBAND KNOWS THAT THE CHILD IS PRESUMABLY NOT HIS? IS HE DOING ANYTHING ABOUT THAT?

Her H knows the child is not his - they were not sleeping together at the time. What do you mean has he done anything about that. I'm pretty sure he hasn't taken a paternity test to prove he isn't the father, but he didn't put his name on the BC and he may have signed something saying he isn't the father. what if she signed something saying he wasn't the father, would that get him off the hook. I know she is not seeking CS from him through the divorce. The child will be 2 in January. ARe you saying that after that if she hasn't filed for CS it will be too late? We were told she could file anytime until the child is 18, and ask for a paternity test anytime too. Do you know this for sure? If my H keeps paying until then to keep things quiet, will that be considered the same as him admitting paternity? He does have a lot of guilt, so its not like he is looking to avoid his responsibility. I just don't like her being able to hold this over our heads. It would be nice if we could wait until after the child is 2, and then do it on our terms.

Forth, the husband CAN sign a paper stating he is not the father, but DNA test will still have to be performed. Be careful cause the court may have your husband pay for both his and her husband's test if pushed, especially if he is paying the cs. He is basically already taking responsibilty for the child. I would really do whatever it is you feel you need to do to protect yourself and your family. I defentely contact an attorney on your rights. You can normally receive a free consultation from them.

FTB

I don't know if this is the law for the entire country or not, but I do know that a case in the Supreme Court stated that a child conceived and born from a marriage is considered the husbands. The case this was is the bio logical father had a DNA test proving he was the father and lost to the husband.

My XMM took me to court for rights to our daughter. He had a signed and norterized paper with my signature stating he was the father, not my husband. XMM lost. The judge did not care. I think that if her H doesn't do something by the time the child is 2 he will automatically be considered the father.

I'm not sure if this will answer your specific question, but I believe that in CA, there is no back support pay without an original court order for CS. I don't think a mom can file for CS after the child turns 6. I might be wrong, but I think that's how it goes...

How come your H is not more afraid of paying unnecessary CS? That sure does scare ME more than anything! This has got to stop!! Get some proof first.

We all remember zebrababy paying all that CS and come to find out the OC wasn't even her H's!!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" />

I agree that we could be paying unecessary CS - I have read old posts and know about Zebrababy and another here who were paying and DNA turned out to be neg. For some reason my H is POSITIVE, 100%. He says the OC looks EXACTLY like him, OC was born exactly 9 months after the one time they forgot (were too drunk) to use a condom, and he KNOWS she was not sleeping with anyone else. What can I say? He seems to be so sure. He knows he will need to get DNA, but he has no hopes at all that this child is not his.
About paternity - I agree that if her H WANTED to be claimed as the father, after a certain amount of time (I think it is 2 years in CA) than he would be, or even if he did nothing to claim that he wasn't. But I guess my ? is this: They were married and he is NOT on the BC and the child does not have his last name. Wouldn't he have had to sign something in the hospital in order for that to happen. Also, they are getting divorced and he is NOT paying CS, getting any custody or any visitation. I'm sure he must be signing away his rights in some way or signing something to say he isn't the father in order for that to happen, don't you think? Would the "assumed paternity" in marriage still apply to him if no one else is named by the time the child is 2, even if they both have said and signed papers that he is not the father?

forth:
I'm pretty sure they both signed a paper stating he was NOT the father. I know in NV that unless the bio father signs and the married man signs a paper stating that he is NOT the father than the husband is assumed the father and put on the birth cirt. CA is not much different than NV. As far as your h. Maybe since he is just paying cs she is happy with that. But you never know if for some reason she gets mad or something. I must say though that your h is at least taking responsiblity for what he BELIEVES to be. ANd he is admitting when he knows what is what. If you understand what I'm saying. That takes a big person and you should give your husband credit for that. I won't go into the other stuff cause I'm not in the position to do so but I did have to tell you that I think it's great that your husband is taking his responsibilty for he feels he needs to do and because he knows in his heart it's his he is doing what he feels is best. JMHO....no flames please.

forh,,,,,,,, am the match to fh. in your case what te courts final ruling would be is up in the air.

to your benefit in ca after a child concieved married turns 2 it is pressumed that they are the child of the marriage.

also in ca there is no back cs due. cs starts on he day that cs paper are filed.

in your situation i would keep the waters calm until your cs is finalized and the baby turns 2.

the twist in your case has nothing to do with the om signing any paper as to the oc's origin. th onlything ht matters is that he file through the courts his denial of paternity. your h paying cs for this length of time may in the courts eyes show he is the father.

another point in yor favor is the money order issue. that way there are no cncelled checks to bring this back on you.

so you may be in good shape anyway.

presumption of husband and 2 year mark:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=52184628747+4+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve


other california codes about paternity:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/calawquery?codesection=fam&codebody=paternity&hits=50

Found another interesting thing. Looks like a bill was introduced to help men who were frauded into being fathers. But the governor vetoed the bill saying it was not specific enough and would cause other problems.

An article:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.asp?Page=\Commentary\archive\200203\COM20020315d.html

CA Paternity Justice Act bill:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/asm/ab_2201-2250/ab_2240_bill_20020220_introduced.html

Governor's comments about veto:
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/01-02/bill/asm/ab_2201-2250/ab_2240_vt_20020926.html

Hey there,
She could put your H's name on the BC without your H's permission...