I AM NOT THE FATHER, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY CHILD SUPPORT?
At the time of
the child's birth, the parents' names are listed on the birth
certificate. In the event
the parties are not married, the parties often sign a Voluntary
Acknowledgment of Paternity, acknowledging that the father and mother
are the child's parents.
Paternity is established as of the date it was signed by each
party, and remains in full force and effect unless rescinded within
sixty (60) days of that date.
This is
particularly important when a father has signed such a voluntary
acknowledgment of paternity, but does not seek to have genetic marker
testing completed at that time.
Genetic marker
testing, completed by taking samples from the mother, the child, and
the alleged father, will establish with almost certainty whether or
not the individual is the father of the child. Any individual who has any
question whatsoever as to whether or not he is the father of the
child should have the genetic marker testing completed prior to
obligating himself, either formally or informally, before agreeing to
pay child support.
In the leading
case, Paternity of Cheryl, a father wanted to set aside a
judgment of paternity more than five years after he had voluntarily
acknowledged paternity.
In that case, the parents had executed an acknowledgment of
parentage in which the father stated he was the father of the
child. He stated he
understood that signing the acknowledgment would have the effect of a
judgment against him, obligating him to support the child. He signed the acknowledgment
as his free act and deed.
In that case,
following the entry of the paternity judgment, the father behaved as
though he were the child's father, having visitation with his
daughter, establishing a relationship with him and with his
family. However, more
than five years after he acknowledged paternity, the father for the
first time requested genetic marker testing. The results of the genetic
testing indicated that in fact he was not the biological father. The father alleged the
determination of his paternity was based on misleading information,
without the benefit of a paternity test of any kind. While the trial court
originally allowed the father's motion for relief from the judgment,
the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts in 2001 vacated the
order, holding that the father did not request relief within a
reasonable period of time.
The Supreme Court did not establish what was
a reasonable period of time. However, it is clear that five
years is too late. While
the father may not have been the biological father pursuant to the
genetic marker test, he waited too long to properly bring the matter
before the court. As
such, his obligations remain in full force and effect to pay child
support for the benefit of the child.
