There may be a bigger problem in NOT going to court than going. Suppose your H is not the bio father of this child? In many states (maybe all), not appearing in court may be construed as refusing to take a paternity test, and the court may rule that your H IS the biological father, whether he actually is or not.

We ran into this problem in reverse when my son filed for custody of his 3 children. His ex tried to claim that he should not have physical custody of their daughter on the grounds that he was not DGD's bio father. Son refused to take the paternity test before court, and the judge said that, because of the way the law was written, he HAD to rule in exDiL's favor. BUT, the judge also told my son, in court, to file an appeal. Why? Because the law was rather ambiguous.

Basically, what the law says is this:

(I'm paraphrasing) "In a paternity hearing, when one party to the proceeding refuses DNA testing, the court SHALL rule for the other party."

The judge said that the word "SHALL" was what kept him from ruling for our son. And, BTW, this had nothing to do with our son being the LEGAL father of our 8yo DGD, as he was always aware of the possibility that she might not be his bio daughter, but acknowledged her as his and raised her for the past 8 years.

The judge did order son to take the DNA test, but ordered exDiL to pay for it. However, before getting to that point, Son did a private DNA test, and filed an appeal with our State Supreme Court. The reason for the private DNA was so that if DGD was not his bio child, he would stall the court-ordered test until after the Supreme Court ruled.

When the private DNA testing came back that she IS 99.992054% his daughter <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> , Son and his attorney dropped the appeal and started pushing for the court-ordered DNA test.

As it turned out, exDiL decided she might as well give up and signed over physical custody to our son. Guess she figured out that the judge didn't like her. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" />

Anyway, if there's a chance that your H might not be this child's father, he needs to take a DNA test. Get some legal advice so you can protect your family.

LC

<small>[ January 18, 2005, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: Lady Clueless ]</small>

Lady, For one thing, he was not officially ordered to go, it was a notice, in the newspaper for one day, We would of never known if not for other family members. From the way it sounds though is that he will go to court but he wants to go for an open adoption. I just don't think the mother will allow it, although we have no idea the extent of anything going on. It seems though that my MIL wants to foster parent this child, and maybe even adoption. This is just so strange, I feel like I'm in the twilight zone.

My hubby seems to think that he won't be able to think clearly, and look after the child's best interests if he get's attached to the child, I think that is abit quircky thinking. I always thought that if you come to know someone to the point that you even risk love for them, that you would know what is better for them then some stranger. just my thought though.

Tomorrow morning hubby will talk with the DCF worker to see what is really going on, I'll let you all know. Thanx for helping, everyone.

The notice in the paper is generally "in lieu" of being served a summons when the correct address for the party is unknown or inaccurate.

My xSiL thought he could avoid court for child support contempt by eluding the process server. Not true. Publication in a newspaper is considered to be sufficient notification.

Since you've already called the court for information, they know that y'all are aware of the process, so not going to court could backfire on you...meaning that you would not be able to claim ignorance of the issue.

Protect yourselves. Find out what the laws are in your state and how they are interpreted. You need real legal advice.

LC

Hubby called DCF worker this morning. Apparently she still has the child but has a court case against her. This is pretty much all they said, she said she couldn't give anymore info, until ok'd, but needs to know if we want to become involved, the decision is ours, so if we decide not to go that is ok.

Apparently she told DCF that he used to live in (town), lie, and that it was basically a one night stand, lie. I told him that he should prob tell the truth, he did about the first part though.

So I dunno, I'm clueless.

<small>[ January 19, 2005, 10:29 AM: Message edited by: smurfgirl ]</small>

Hello,
I was just wondering if he is presumed to be the father? Is a notice in a newspaper sufficient for ruling for paternity?

I know in CA there are men that had no idea there was a paternity sued against them and if you don't response within 30 days you consider the father regardless of DNA and child support will be taking out of your check. There was a bill to ammended this and change the laws but the governor vetoed it. Probably they suspect a large of men paying for kids that are not theres and the mother is on welfare so the state gets some of the money.

Funny, our ex-OW did similiar thing said she could not find H and it was result of ONS. Which is not true. She nows how to get into contact with my H if she really wanted too.

I just wanted to add there laywers that will give a free consultation over the phone. If I were I would call a lawyer and see what they say.


Dawn

<small>[ January 21, 2005, 06:16 PM: Message edited by: Dawn71 ]</small>

We know it isn't about child support, it is a case against her for neglect. In CT we don't have that law, you can't even sue a person without an adress here. Yeah I would have to remind him to talk to a lawyer about this. They want him to make a decision blindly as to weather or not he will become involved, until then they aren't willing to disclose the case. Hubby doesn't want to get involved unless there is a good reason to do so. Uhg. So We will talk to the DCF worker monday, hopefully she will tell us what is up, and I'll remind hubby to talk to a lawyer. If he decides to get involved he will have to go that day to fill out paper work to have an attorney assigned to him. We'll see...

Hi,
I don't understand why they would make him do anything. Paterinty is not establish. It probably says unknown for the father. Here you can't put a father on BC without establishing paternity or the father signing something to waiver his rights for DNA testing because he knows he is the father.

I would not sign anything unless he talks to lawyer. That is just my 2 cents though. I can see him signing something that he should not have.

I would Definetly, get DNA testing done first before signing anything.

Dawn