Y'all don't get birth certificates, Arkansas babies!

[Lemur866]

When my kids were born I didn’t have to undergo a DNA test to prove that I was the biological father of those kids. They just wrote down my name.

In just about all cases you can become the legal father of a newborn baby just by the mother stating that you’re the father, and you don’t deny it. If there is no disputation of paternity then the matter is closed.

The establishment of paternity has a long legal history that mostly predates DNA tests. The legal principle is generally that when a married woman has a child, her husband is the legal father of those children. The courts aren’t going to dig into who had sex with who, if you’re the husband you’re the father, and if your wife is fooling around then that’s your problem, not the court’s problem.

Also there’s generally a “no backsies” rule. A man generally has a limited time to dispute paternity, and if he accepts paternity that’s it, he’s the legal father, no matter what a future DNA test might or might not show. Paternity is a social and legal matter, not a biological matter.

Yes, you can be assigned legal paternity for a baby if a DNA test shows you’re the biological father, even if you have no interest in the kid. But that’s because society has an interest in making sure children are taken care of and that costs money. And so we will force you to care for that child, because otherwise the rest of us will have to do it. Sure, you don’t want to take care of the brat, but neither do the rest of us, and you’re the one who created it, not us, so it’s on you.

[carnivorousplant]

@Lemur866

When my kids were born I didn’t have to undergo a DNA test to prove that I was the biological father of those kids. They just wrote down my name.

I believe that is generally the case.

[puzzlegal]

@carnivorousplant

There is the sentence, “until that status is rebutted or confirmed in a judicial proceeding.”

Yeah, that source isn’t clear as to how hard that would be to do. Here’s a bit from Maryland, suggesting that in Maryland, it is possible to legally rebut that presumption, but really really hard:

https://www.peoples-law.org/paternity

n Maryland, if the mother is married at the time of the child’s conception or birth, the law presumes that her husband is the baby’s father. If the mother is unmarried when the child is born, paternity can be established…

Example: I am the biological father of a minor child, and I am in a relationship with the child’s mother. The mother was married to another man when the child was born, but is now divorced. Can we change the child’s last name and birth certificate?

Under Maryland law, the ex-husband is presumed to be the child’s father because the child was born during the marriage. The court can’t accept evidence to the contrary (such as DNA testing) unless it finds that it would be in the child’s best interest to disturb the marital presumption of parentage. See, for example, Ashley v. Mattingly, 176 Md. App. 38 (2007); Kamp v. Dept. of Human Servs. ex rel. Duckworth, 410 Md. 645 (2009); Monroe v. Monroe, 329 Md. 758 (1993); Mulligan v. Corbett, 426 Md. 670 (2012); Turner v. Whisted, 327 Md. 106 (1992).

If you, the mother, and the ex-husband are all in agreement, the court is more likely to be willing to enter an order recognizing you as the father and changing the child’s name. That order could also direct the appropriate changes to the birth certificate. It will be more difficult if you, or the mother, or the ex-husband, objects.

So, the husband is pretty much on the hook unless somehow the state thinks it would be better for the child if some other guy were the legal father.

[suranyi]

@Lemur866

When my kids were born I didn’t have to undergo a DNA test to prove that I was the biological father of those kids. They just wrote down my name.

In just about all cases you can become the legal father of a newborn baby just by the mother stating that you’re the father, and you don’t deny it. If there is no disputation of paternity then the matter is closed.

The establishment of paternity has a long legal history that mostly predates DNA tests. The legal principle is generally that when a married woman has a child, her husband is the legal father of those children. The courts aren’t going to dig into who had sex with who, if you’re the husband you’re the father, and if your wife is fooling around then that’s your problem, not the court’s problem.

Also there’s generally a “no backsies” rule. A man generally has a limited time to dispute paternity, and if he accepts paternity that’s it, he’s the legal father, no matter what a future DNA test might or might not show. Paternity is a social and legal matter, not a biological matter.

Yes, you can be assigned legal paternity for a baby if a DNA test shows you’re the biological father, even if you have no interest in the kid. But that’s because society has an interest in making sure children are taken care of and that costs money. And so we will force you to care for that child, because otherwise the rest of us will have to do it. Sure, you don’t want to take care of the brat, but neither do the rest of us, and you’re the one who created it, not us, so it’s on you.

True for maternity as well. Our son was born via egg donation, hence my wife is not his biological mother. But she is on the birth certificate, and is his legal mother.

[carnivorousplant]

@puzzlegal

Yeah, that source isn’t clear as to how hard that would be to do. Here’s a bit from Maryland, suggesting that in Maryland, it is possible to legally rebut that presumption, but really really hard:

Paternity | The Maryland People's Law Library

So, the husband is pretty much on the hook unless somehow the state thinks it would be better for the child if some other guy were the legal father.

“My (probably former) wife and I are European. The kid is Lithuanian.” should be quite a valid argument.

[LSLGuy]

Huh?

[Damuri_Ajashi]

@septimus

Now, let’s be fair. Many of us agree that the heinous offspring of a lesbian witches’ coven, impregnated with semen from a Devil’s spell-cast Gila monster, should NOT be allowed a passport, or to serve as President. Of course, you’re entitled to your own opinion on this, however wrong.

But Dixie boys are not universally intolerant. If an Arkansan good 'ol boy were able to fornicate with his AR-15 and succeed at procreation, I’m sure there’d be no problem granting the half-man half-gun mutant a birth certificate. Even the 35 year minimum to run for President should then be waived, I think.

Its not a mutant. Its a hybrid. The next step on the evolutionary ladder. And you better believe it’s got my vote the moment its born.

You guys probably want the AR-15 to abort the nascent hybrid AR-15/baby so the AR-15 can attend Hillary Clinton 2020 rallies or something.

[DesertDog]

@Lemur866

The establishment of paternity has a long legal history that mostly predates DNA tests. The legal principle is generally that when a married woman has a child, her husband is the legal father of those children. The courts aren’t going to dig into who had sex with who, if you’re the husband you’re the father, and if your wife is fooling around then that’s your problem, not the court’s problem.

Dave Allen on that.

[carnivorousplant]

The best $400.00 that I ever spent.

[Chronos]

Just think, in 18 years there’s going to be a cohort of new citizens who are going to have a very hard time getting a government-issued photo ID because of this. And they’re going to be required to show that photo ID in order to be allowed to vote.

[carnivorousplant]

@Chronos

Just think, in 18 years there’s going to be a cohort of new citizens who are going to have a very hard time getting a government-issued photo ID because of this. And they’re going to be required to show that photo ID in order to be allowed to vote.

No, the Republican Governor immediately capitulated to prevent such a thing.

A moderator who doesn’t read the entire thread! I am shocked!