I live in Ohio with my boyfriend. He has a child from a previous marriage. I'm not sure if his name is on her birth certificate at all; but her last name is not his. We won't get into the type of person his ex is, but she had connections at the hospital and the second he left they put her last name on the child's birth certificate instead of his. They have never had a test done, but if her last name is different does he still have to pay child support? Or does that all count on whether his name is on the certificate at all?

What matters is who the father is, not whose name is on the birth certificate. SHE has the decision what last name to use. He has no input. You don't need connections and what kind of person she is doesn't matter. It's her choice.

Yes, if it is his child it's his responsibility to support the child AFTER there is DNA proof that it is his child.

the point is that the name was CHANGED without his consent, yes, the type of person she is does matter because there is the probability that it isn't his. That system is totally messed up anyway, just because she actually gave birth doesn't make the child any more hers than his so there should be equal input. No DNA testing and I never implied that it wasn't his responsibility; just curious as to whether or not the law states that he HAS to pay; not if he SHOULD.

If the child is his, and she asks for support, she'll get it. I don't know where you are getting your information from but it is not correct. A hospital doesn't prepare a BC, it passes on the information of the birth along with the paperwork the MOTHER fills out to the department of vital records. They then then prepare the BC. The mother can name the child whatever she wants to, and there is absolutely no requirement that the child be named after the father. In some states, there is even a window in which a name on a birth certificate can be altered without a court order. I say all of that to place emphasis on the fact that she has the right to choose the last name, and that no fraud was committed by her not choosing his.

Furthermore, if they were married at the time the child was born, he is the legal father, and there are limitations that vary by state as to how long he can contest that if there is any doubt.

I missed that you were in Ohio. Here is the relevant law section. The emphasis is mine.

(F)(1) If the mother of a child was married at the time of either conception or birth or between conception and birth, the child shall be registered in the surname designated by the mother, and the name of the husband shall be entered on the certificate as the father of the child. The presumption of paternity shall be in accordance with section 3111.03 of the Revised Code.

the point is that the name was CHANGED without his consent, yes, the type of person she is does matter because there is the probability that it isn't his. That system is totally messed up anyway, just because she actually gave birth doesn't make the child any more hers than his so there should be equal input. No DNA testing and I never implied that it wasn't his responsibility; just curious as to wether or not the law states that he HAS to pay; not if he SHOULD.


You said her last name was put on the birth certificate. You said nothing about CHANGING the birth certificate. You referred to the type of person she is in connection with the hospital and the birth certificate, not in connection with anything else.

Yes, the State law says he HAS to pay if it's his child. Why would you think it's not his responsibility, name on the birth certificate or not?

I don't understand your attitude. You asked. I answered according to law and a lot of years of experience.

I missed that you were in Ohio. Here is the relevant law section. The emphasis is mine.

(F)(1) If the mother of a child was married at the time of either conception or birth or between conception and birth, the child shall be registered in the surname designated by the mother, and the name of the husband shall be entered on the certificate as the father of the child. The presumption of paternity shall be in accordance with section 3111.03 of the Revised Code.


Right - it's the mother's decision. The type of person she is and her connections do not matter. Unfortunately, OP has now come back and stated that the "ex" CHANGED the name on the because so...

Have no idea of the status between boyfriend and "ex" when child was conceived and born. That would be helpful.

She mentioned that the child was from a previous marriage in the question, so I answered with the presumption that that child was a product of the marriage.

She mentioned that the child was from a previous marriage in the question, so I answered with the presumption that that child was a product of the marriage.


Right. I'm not really sure because they were married (?) but he doesn't know if his name is on the birth certificate. Only OP knows.

I think she doesn't know, and he hasn't been forthcoming about it. Although, if they were married, there should have been a child support order somewhere in that divorce. There is a lot here that is unclear, and we are hearing it from a third party that wasn't involved in any of it.

JAM, you have seen the questions that we have asked and the information that we have had to speculate on because we don't have the facts from you. Please come back and clarify.

Ok I just sort of read through it once so I may miss a few points. They weren't married at the time but the family pushed for a marriage after the child was born, then they were divorced. I never implied that it wasn't his responsibility -this question comes from the mother all of a sudden demanding more child support and wanting to take him to court and me wondering if he is even supposed to be paying what he is... he would help her out anyway -I just wanted more information. She lives with her parents and has no job and he is normally working more than one which is why he didn't fight for custody. I didn't argue that it wasn't her decision -just that I think it is sort of stupid that the decision lies with the mother only. He has been very forthcoming with everything I've asked but as I was asking the question I realized that I didn't know if his name was on it or not. We've had the issue resolved, so it doesn't matter, but thanks.

Child support is money ordered though the court, so if there is no child support order, the money he has been giving may be a gift or informal support.

The mother should ( and has the right) to go to court to ask for court ordered support.

The court will set the proper amount according to state laws and rules.

His name being on, or not being on the birth certificate does not matter really. What last name the child has, makes no difference.

If he is not on the birth certificate, he may be required to take a DNA test to prove he is the father or he may merely sign that he is the father in court ( if he has not already)

If there were married shortly after the birth (within a year I believe), then he is probably the legal father.

That means he will owe child support until and unless the paternity can challenged. However, the child support is contingent on a court order. If they were divorced, then it is likely that his support payments are part of the divorce decree. If she is demanding more support it HAS to be done through the court. If there is no court order, then he should go to court so support can be formalized. If there is, then unless his income has changed she isn't going to get a modification.

Thanks ScottGem and Fr_Chuck. I don't really have all of the details because I didn't want to get in the middle... I know what I need to know I was just honestly curious as to what the law states. I think he is giving it as informal support -they didn't want to have to pay a million dollars for divorce so they set their own standards of child care. His salary has actually gone down so I didn't figure she would have any basis for more support anyway. I'm thinking he signed himself up for it, like I mentioned before it wasn't a question of responsibility.

If the support amount was not set by court order it may have been less that statutory limits. Which means, even with a reduction of income, the amount he owes could go up. Also, any amount paid not under a court order could be considered gifts, rather than support.