My sons father is a loser and I don't want him in our life.

Yes-there is time frame...till child's 18 birthday.
109.125 gives the bio father the rights to contest only if there was a legal separation. In this case the main problem is because and its absent father's name.

Ewww, bad for the OP then

People have to live with the consequences of their actions and lives.

In these conditions the OP does not have standing to ask for back child support/she has ever known facts/, but the boyfriend has claim grounds for distress.

Thank you so much you have made my day. I will keep you posted.

Well you need to read further. There are other statutes I didn't look at.

I understand that people have to live with the consequences of their actions but my child should not have to.

I haven't looked at the Oregon statute yet but I can tell you under California law (Oregon often follows our lead on things) the bio-dad is out. I frankly don't think he has any rights whatsoever- none under the relevant statute and no constitutional arguments to fall back on either. His DNA test means nothing and is irrelevant if it wasn't ordered by the court.

Understanding this is Oregon, I'll take a look at 109.070 and see if it changes my mind. But in California, as I said, you'd have nothing to worry about and could tell the bio-dad to get lost. If he went to court you'd stand a very good chance of having his case through out.

Oregon's law looks an awful lot like California's but I'd have to research the case annotations to provide a definitive answer, which I don't have access to at the moment.

It seems the husband has a presumption of paternity (irrespective of the biology) and the bio-dad has none. The DNA testing is irrelevant as it was not court ordered.

Sounds like a pretty strong case against bio-dad ever prevailing.

In my view the child does not have a legal father in this case.109.070 is not fully applicable because no one is listed as a father on because.In this way there is no conclusive presumption that the husband is the legal father.
Second-the OP allows boyfriend to have a sort of relationship with his son and co-operate voluntary with him/ for DNA tests for example/.
Oregon law is designated to protect intact families from third party intruders only if both/ husband and wife/ have taken their legal responsibilities but in this case husband has never done it.HE IS NOT ON CHILD'S because.
Here it has to be read :
ORS 109.070(1) – that a married woman’s husband is rebuttably presumed to be the father of children born to her during the marriage.
109.124 2) “Child born out of wedlock” means a child born to an unmarried woman or to a married woman by a man other than her husband.
ORS 109.125 (1) Any of the following may initiate proceedings under this section:
(d) A [person] man claiming to be the father of a child born out of wedlock or of an
Unborn child who may be born out of wedlock;
(A) The name of the mother of the child born out of wedlock or the [female] woman
Pregnant with a child who may be born out of wedlock;
(B) The name of the mother's husband if the child is alleged to be a child born to a
Married woman by a man other than her husband.
[(B)] (C) Facts showing the petitioner's status to initiate proceedings;
[(C)] (D) A statement that a respondent is the father;

Here the case is not paternity disestablishment but paternity establishment.
109.125 requires him to file a motion for PE,to name mother's husband as a party.to present all facts/(7) If a man's paternity of a child has been established under ORS 109.070 and the
Paternity has not been disestablished before proceedings are initiated under ORS 109.125,
The court may not render a judgment under ORS 109.124 to 109.230 establishing another
Man's paternity of the child unless the judgment also disestablishes the paternity
Established under ORS 109.070
SECTION 2. ORS 109.103 is amended to read:

ORS 109.124, as amended by section 20, chapter 160, Oregon Laws 2005, is
Amended to read:
109.124. As used in ORS 109.124 to 109.230, unless the context requires otherwise:
* * *
(2) “Child born out of wedlock” means a child born to an unmarried woman[,] or to a
Married woman by a man other than her husband[, if the conclusive presumption in ORS 109.070
(1)(a) does not apply]