Heeeellllllppppp

What is the name of your state? ca

Hello. I have a friend who is now divorced, but when he was married, his wife had a child...during the divorce proceedings she finally told him he was not the biological father. They did paternity tests and he is not. His name is still on the birth certificate.
He still supports the child, visits with her and so on. He wants to fight for full custody because the mother is unfit. He is afraid that if he reports her to CPS they will place her with the state instead of with him. Is he right on this?
Thanks for any help anyone can give.
God bless

Awesomemom said:

What is the name of your state? ca

Hello. I have a friend who is now divorced, but when he was married, his wife had a child...during the divorce proceedings she finally told him he was not the biological father. They did paternity tests and he is not. His name is still on the birth certificate.
He still supports the child, visits with her and so on. He wants to fight for full custody because the mother is unfit. He is afraid that if he reports her to CPS they will place her with the state instead of with him. Is he right on this?
Thanks for any help anyone can give.
God bless

Click to expand...

My response:

He's wrong - - and for his sake, it's good that he is. You see, she thought that her "bombshell" would protect her. Well, she thought WRONG - - at least in California.

He can file his Petition for custody. He's safe in California. The child of a wife cohabiting at time of conception with her husband, who is not impotent or sterile, is "conclusively" presumed to be a child of the marriage. [Ca Fam § 7540; see Michael H. v. Gerald D. (1989) 491 U.S. 110, 129-130, 109 S.Ct. 2333, 2345--upholding presumption's facial constitutionality; compare Dawn D. v. Super.Ct. (Jerry K.) (1998) 17 Cal.4th 932, 935, 72 Cal.Rptr.2d 871, 872--§ 7540 presumption inapplicable where spouses not cohabiting--i.e., living together as husband and wife--at time of conception]

Because "policy and logic" under the particular facts control the outcome, the weighing process may tip the scales in favor of a non-biological presumptive father as against the competing claim of a biological presumptive father. Biological paternity is not necessarily determinative. [In re Kiana A., supra, 93 Cal.App.4th at 1117-1118, 113 Cal.Rptr.2d at 677-678--§ 7611(d) presumptive father (receiving child into home and acknowledging as his natural child) prevailed over alleged biological father with § 7611(c) presumed parent status (marriage and name on birth certificate); see also Steven W. v. Matthew S. (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1108, 1116-1117, 39 Cal.Rptr.2d 535, 539--§ 7611(d) presumed father prevailed over biological father's § 7611(a) presumed parent status]

IAAL

thank you very much, very, very much.