Tweet
Originally posted by LynahFan
View Post
The DNA testing for paternity purposes has really only been around, and commonly used, for about 30 years. My guess is most of these laws were put in place long before that.
Before DNA testing, again as I understand it, the only type of paternity testing used for many years was blood tests. But the blood tests didn't establish paternity, they just excluded a person.
So that created an issue as to who has the burden of proof in establishing paternity over a child. I think that most legislatures passed laws that said that children born during the course of a marriage were presumed to be the child of the husband in that marriage. In other words, he was stuck unless he could prove otherwise if he didn't think the child was his.
However, in a non-marriage situation, I think the burden was then on the mother to establish paternity.
Hence, some states (apparently) decided that in order to fit within those laws, they would not finalize a divorce until the child was born, basically establishing paternity with the husband. There may even be a reason tied to application of that presumption if the husband were to move to another state, for instance (say a state where the presumption is paternity if the child is born during wedlock, but no presumption if born outside of wedlock).
I have no real idea as to the legislative history of the statutes in question, but I am pretty confident that they really don't have anything to do with trying to hold up a divorce, but more to do with establishing support obligations.
And, as others have said, my posts are not intended to endorse these laws, no matter how old. It seems to me that with DNA testing that we have now, many of those old laws are probably outdated.
Comment