Texas - fraud/mistaken paternity bill

[Proserpina]

SB 785 also includes men who were adjudicated to be the father due to their non-appearance at court and includes any man who did not have DNA testing and was adjudicated as Dad - the exceptions are fathers who adopted the children, gestaational agreements, and artificial insemination).

Whether or not the man signed the AOP, if a default Judgment of Paternity was entered against him, or if there was a prior adjudication of paternity without DNA testing, per this bill, a man has a right to file to terminate his paternity (again, he has until 8/31/12 to file, without having to prove when he learned of the facts which led him to believe he is not Dad. After 8/31/12, he can only file within one year of learning of the facts re non-parentage.

If the Petition states the required info (and that info is verified at a pretrial hearing), then the court will order genetic testing (that's about $570. at Labcorp- he pays); if the DNA test comes back confirming he is Dad, the Court will simply deny the Petition.
If the DNA test comes back showing he is not Dad, then the Court will order all current child support and medical support to be terminated (prior support accrued is still owed by 'non-Dad').

Mom (or the child support agency) is free to file a Paternity case against the 'real bio-Dad', but the Court can't order any retroactive child or medical support - the Court can only order 'new Dad' to pay current c/s and m/s.

(It is not positive that 'man' has to pay for parentage testing (but, in the interest of expediting the case, it's easier if he does, and also the date when the 'open period' for filing terminates was reported in places as 8/31/11, but the prospective amendment written by the legislature states 8/31/2012.

Can't thank you enough for posting this.

 

[garrula lingua]

The first filing hit a local court: it was a Petition to Terminate in response to a Contempt/Enforcement action by the Office of the Attorney General.

(Part of the bill states there can be no contempt action on the arrears if he is not Dad).

Judge agreed with the new bill, found the Respondent's testimony was sufficient and testing was in the best interest of the child, and ordered Paternity testing and put over the Contempt action for six months.

I feel the Texas floodgates coming. Labcorp is going to earn a handsome profit.

 

[CSO286]

If the Petition states the required info (and that info is verified at a pretrial hearing), then the court will order genetic testing (that's about $570. at Labcorp- he pays); if the DNA test comes back confirming he is Dad, the Court will simply deny the Petition.

The first filing hit a local court: it was a Petition to Terminate in response to a Contempt/Enforcement action by the Office of the Attorney General.

(Part of the bill states there can be no contempt action on the arrears if he is not Dad).

Judge agreed with the new bill, found the Respondent's testimony was sufficient and testing was in the best interest of the child, and ordered Paternity testing and put over the Contempt action for six months.

I feel the Texas floodgates coming. Labcorp is going to earn a handsome profit.

GL, Is "dad" on the hook still for the testing if he's found not to be Dad?

 

[garrula lingua]

CSO,

That's being argued. Some attorneys believe the Court should pay, and the Court can pass the costs to the parent at the end of the case; the bill doesn't state who pays.

Right now, when the OAG is involved, they are paying for the paternity testing (no reimbursement requested by the OAG).

If 'Dad' files, independently, in District Court, it appears he will pay.

There should be a reimbursement policy; if he's confirmed as Dad, he pays; if he's not Dad, she pays (few are suggesting Mom pay, but why not ?).

I don't think public funds should be used for testing purposes, without a parent reimbursing for the costs.

 

[CSO286]

CSO,

That's being argued. Some attorneys believe the Court should pay, and the Court can pass the costs to the parent at the end of the case; the bill doesn't state who pays.

Right now, when the OAG is involved, they are paying for the paternity testing (no reimbursement requested by the OAG).

If 'Dad' files, independently, in District Court, it appears he will pay.

There should be a reimbursement policy; if he's confirmed as Dad, he pays; if he's not Dad, she pays (few are suggesting Mom pay, but why not ?).

I don't think public funds should be used for testing purposes, without a parent reimbursing for the costs.

I fervently believe that if "dad" is excluded as a possible father, he should not be on the hook for the testing costs.

And I do believe that there are situations where Mom should be expected to pick up the tab for the testing.

 

[mistoffolees]

I fervently believe that if "dad" is excluded as a possible father, he should not be on the hook for the testing costs.

And I do believe that there are situations where Mom should be expected to pick up the tab for the testing.

I agree, but OTOH, if "dad" is excluded as the possible father, he's going to save himself many years of CS, so the cost of the testing isn't that big a deal.