I understand that I'm going to get some very nasty responses but I'm looking for someone who has been in this situation and can give me advice. I have a soon to be 4 yr old son. I'm in a 10 yr marriage and about 4 yrs ago my husband and I both stepped out together with different people. I ended up pregnant. My husband and I are still together but he did not want to be on the birth certificate but has been the only father and a fabulous one for my son. The person I stepped out with was younger and was a lot different then he is now. The biological father found out about his son through a mutual acquaintance 10 months ago and since has demanded to see his son and trying to break up my marriage. Since- the biological father has moved in with his mother, does not work, can't keep a job and deciede to make his body one complete tattoo yes even on his face. He has horrible veiws and in my opinion and many other's is not a productive member of society. His mother is a wonderfu person but basically takes care of him at the age of 30 and most of the time I have to go through her because he can't seem to even hold a conversation with me. I have documented all the times I have let him see his son but I just can't do it anymore. I need this person out of our lives. I have come to understand that he is this way because he is on medicine for Bi-polor and can't take care of himself. Yet he wants to have a say in his son's life and even thinks my son should have a tattoo on his face when he is older. I LOTH THIS PERSON, and the example he is setting for my son. Through DNA testing it has been proven that he is the father but he is not on the birth certificate. My husband and I don't have money for courts but I know that my sons father has his mother pay for an attorney they already have if necessary . What can my husband and I do to get this person out of our lives.

I understand that I'm going to get some very nasty responses but I'm looking for someone who has been in this situation and can give me advice. I have a soon to be 4 yr old son. I'm in a 10 yr marriage and about 4 yrs ago my husband and I both stepped out together with different people. I ended up pregnant. My husband and I are still together but he did not want to be on the birth certificate but has been the only father and a fabulous one for my son. The person I stepped out with was younger and was alot different then he is now. The biological father found out about his son through a mutual acquaintance 10 months ago and since has demanded to see his son and trying to break up my marriage. Since- the biological father has moved in with his mother, does not work, can't keep a job and deciede to make his body one complete tattoo yes even on his face. He has horrible veiws and in my opinion and many other's is not a productive member of society. His mother is a wonderfu person but basically takes care of him at the age of 30 and most of the time I have to go through her because he can't seem to even hold a conversation with me. I have documented all the times I have let him see his son but I just can't do it anymore. I need this person out of our lives. I have come to understand that he is this way because he is on medicine for Bi-polor and can't take care of himself. Yet he wants to have a say in his son's life and even thinks my son should have a tattoo on his face when he is older. I LOTH THIS PERSON, and the example he is setting for my son. Through DNA testing it has been proven that he is the father but he is not on the birth certificate. My husband and I don't have money for courts but I know that my sons father has his mother pay for an attorney they already have if necessary . What can my husband and I do to get this person out of our lives.


You can't get the biological father of your child out of your lives or the life of his child UNLESS you go to Court, file a Petition and prove his life style and medical problems present a danger to the child. You will need proof. While you're there, ask for support if you're not getting any or an enforcement if a previous support order if there is one.

You say your husband didn't want to be on the BC. If the father agrees to an adoption would your husband be willing to adopt the child?

Whether he's on the BC does not matter if he's been proven to be the father through DNA.

You don't even need an Attorney to file in the local branch of your Court that handles these matters.

I would ignore his plans for your son's future - by that time your son can make up his own mind.

Did the father have medical problems, all these other issues, during your affair or are these recent concerns?

You can't get the biological father of your child out of your lives or the life of his child UNLESS you go to Court, file a Petition and prove his life style and medical problems present a danger to the child. You will need proof. While you're there, ask for support if you're not getting any or an enforcement if a previous support order if there is one.

You say your husband didn't want to be on the BC. If the father agrees to an adoption would your husband be willing to adopt the child?

Whether or not he's on the BC does not matter if he's been proven to be the father through DNA.

You don't even need an Attorney to file in the local branch of your Court that handles these matters.

I would ignore his plans for your son's future - by that time your son can make up his own mind.

Did the father have medical problems, all these other issues, during your affair or are these recent concerns?

Thank you for your advice.
He was much different when I was having an affair with him he has always been this way but he is worse now. So- no these concerns have always been but are even more now because he is just not right mentally. I will do as you suggested but I'm scared. I don't to lose my son to him.

Who IS on the birth certificatre as father? Has the bio father gone to court to enforce his rights? Under what circumstances was the DNA test done? What area do you live in?

As you can see you left out a lot of pertinent info here. Its possible, depending on where you live that your husband may have become, by default the legal father. In that case, the bio father has no rights.

As Judy pointed out, the only way to get the bio father out of your life is to go to court. What strategy you take in court depends on the amswers to the questions I asked. But if you go into a court without an attorney against the other party who has an attorney, the likelihood is you will lose.

Thank you for your advice.
He was much different when I was having an affair with him he has always been this way but he is worse now. So- no these concerns have always been but are even more now because he is just not right mentally. I will do as you suggested but I'm scared. I don't to lose my son to him.



I wouldn't be afraid - you won't lose custody unless you're unfit and from what you have explained, you are not.

Will he get Court ordered visitation? Probably, but you can ask that it be supervised by a third party.

Will that work for you?

Who IS on the birth certificatre as father? Has the bio father gone to court to enforce his rights? Under what circumstances was the DNA test done? What area do you live in?

As you can see you left out a lot of pertinent info here. Its possible, depending on where you live that your husband may have become, by default the legal father. In that case, the bio father has no rights.

As Judy pointed out, the only way to get the bio father out of your life is to go to court. What strategy you take in court depends on the amswers to the questions I asked. But if you go into a court without an attorney against the other party who has an attorney, the likelihood is you will lose.

We live in the state of Oregon.
No one is on the BC right now
The Bio father has not gone to court but has an attorney available to him.
The DNA test was done at DNA services of America and will hold up in court and this was performed under his BF wish.
I really can't afford an attorney there has to be a different way.

I wouldn't be afraid - you won't lose custody unless you're unfit and from what you have explained, you are not.

Will he get Court ordered visitation? Probably, but you can ask that it be supervised by a third party.

Will that work for you?

Yes but how much visitation are we talking. I think he is such a bad influence on my son

Yes but how much visitation are we talking. I think he is such a bad influence on my son



Okay, you gather your evidence, take it to Court - Court interviews and evaluates and makes that determination. No way to know in advance how much visitation he will get.

Okay, you gather your evidence, take it to Court - Court interviews and evaluates and makes that determination. No way to know in advance how much visitation he will get.

I will look into what you said.
Thank you very much for your help

First, frankly I don't think you can afford NOT to have an attorney if the bio father has one. Not if you want him out of your lives.

As Judy noted there is no predicting what a judge will do as far as visitation is concerned. But I do have good news for you. You need to get VERY familiar with ORS 109.070-072. The way I read those statutes, if you are your husband were legally married at the time of conception then he is considered the legal father. I'm less clear on this, but I think a challenge to legal paternity needs to be mounted within 2 years. Since your child is 4, I think the bio father's window of opportunity has past and I believe a judge will rule that your husband is the legal father and the bio father has no rights.

But I'm not an attorney so I can't guarantee that's the way things will go.

You also need to prepare all the evidence you can on the bio father's unfitness as a back up. If the judge rules for him, then you can probably force supervised visitation at least initially.

But I really think you should start with by invoking 109.070 and claiming that your husband is the legal father and the its past the time to challenge that.

Good luck and keep us posted.

Ok-you are in Oregon...
109.070. (1) The paternity of a person may be established as
Follows:
(a) The child of a wife cohabiting with her husband who
Was not impotent or sterile at the time of the conception of the
Child is conclusively presumed to be the child of her husband,
Whether the marriage of the husband and wife may be
Void.
(b) A child born in wedlock, there being no judgment of
separation from bed or board, is presumed to be the child of the mother's husband, whether the marriage of the husband and wife may be void. This is a disputable presumption.


(2) The paternity of a child established under subsection
(1)(a) or (c) of this section may be challenged in an action or
Proceeding by the husband or wife. The paternity may not be
challenged by a person other than the husband or wife as long as the husband and wife are married and cohabiting, unless the
husband and wife consent to the challenge.


I am interested in how you did not list father's name on your child's BC when you were married then.

W
The DNA test was done at DNA services of America and will hold up in court and this was performed under his BF wish.
Only court ordered tests are allowed to be present as an evidence.

Only court ordered tests are allowed to be present as an evidence.

I was thinking along the same lines, that's why I asked how it came to have been done. But given that it would seem that 109.070-072 doesn't allow the bio-father to bring an action, the DNA test would be moot.

Scott,
I can see some obscure moments:
1.The OP is willing to co-operate with her ex lover and biofather of the child/
he biological father found out about his son through a mutual acquaintance 10 months ago and since has demanded to see his son and trying to break up my marriage...The DNA test was done at DNA services of America and will hold up in court and this was performed under his BF wish.
2. The husband is not willing to take legal responsibilities
3.It can be viewed that the family acknoledge that her ex-lover is the real father.
According to this the Court may grant custody rights to the biofather notwithstanding 109.070

First, frankly I don't think you can afford NOT to have an attorney if the bio father has one. Not if you want him out of your lives.

As Judy noted there is no predicting what a judge will do as far as visitation is concerned. But I do have good news for you. You need to get VERY familiar with ORS 109.070-072. The way I read those statutes, if you are your husband were legally married at the time of conception then he is considered the legal father. I'm less clear on this, but I think a challenge to legal paternity needs to be mounted within 2 years. Since your child is 4, I think the bio father's window of opportunity has past and I believe a judge will rule that your husband is the legal father and the bio father has no rights.

But I'm not an attorney so I can't guarantee that's the way things will go.

You also need to prepare all the evidence you can on the bio father's unfitness as a back up. If the judge rules for him, then you can probably force supervised visitation at least initially.

But I really think you should start off with by invoking 109.070 and claiming that your husband is the legal father and the its past the time to challenge that.

Good luck and keep us posted.



Excellent research - but I think you may have missed what I know I missed the first time around: "Through DNA testing it has been proven that he is the father but he is not on the birth certificate." I wonder if that changes things? He's legally recognized but not on the BC.

I don't know the who/what/why of the DNA testing but apparently there's been some action taken in the past.

Off to read 109.070 - !

[QUOTE=JudyKayTee;1428702 "Through DNA testing it has been proven that he is the father but he is not on the birth certificate." I wonder if that changes things? He's legally recognized but not on the BC.[/QUOTE]
Having DNA testing done does not mean legal recognizing yet.

but I think you may have missed ... I don't know the who/what/why of the DNA testing but apparently there's been some action taken in the past.


That's why I asked the question. Anyone can go to a lab and have a DNA test done. But generally that won't be recognized by a court unless the court orders it. That's why I wanted to know if the test was done privately or through actions of a court. Since the test was done privately, the bio-father would need to get past 109.070 somehow to file for a change in legal paternity.

I agree with GV70 that there is some muddying of the waters here and that's why I think its imperative that she consult an attorney. But I'm wondering if one of the reasons, the bio-father has not filed as yet is that his attorney is telling him that he hasn't a leg to stand on because of 109.070.

BTW, I asked GV70 and a couple of our other Family Law mavens to look at this and give us their take. So thanks guys for helping out.

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.

109.125 Who may initiate proceedings; petition; parties.
(d) A man claiming to be the father of a child born out of wedlock... 2) Proceedings shall be initiated by the filing of a duly verified petition of the initiating party. The petition shall contain:

(a) If the initiating party is one of those specified in subsection (1)(a), (b), (c) or (e) of this section:

(A) The name of the mother of the child born out of wedlock or the 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;

(C) Facts showing the petitioner’s status to initiate proceedings;

(D) A statement that a respondent is the father;

(E) The probable time or period during which conception took place; and

(F) A statement of the specific relief sought.

(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.

I've just made a phone call to my Oregon friend/she is a lawyer/. In her view ORS 109.070. Is not applicable to this case because no one was listed as a father on the BC.

OK so 109.125 gives the bio father the rights to contest, but is there any time frame by which he must file?

OK so 109.125 gives the bio father the rights to contest, but is there any time frame by which he must file?

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 BC and its absent father's name.

Ewww, bad for the OP then

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 BF has claim grounds for distress.

First, frankly I don't think you can afford NOT to have an attorney if the bio father has one. Not if you want him out of your lives.

As Judy noted there is no predicting what a judge will do as far as visitation is concerned. But I do have good news for you. You need to get VERY familiar with ORS 109.070-072. The way I read those statutes, if you are your husband were legally married at the time of conception then he is considered the legal father. I'm less clear on this, but I think a challenge to legal paternity needs to be mounted within 2 years. Since your child is 4, I think the bio father's window of opportunity has past and I believe a judge will rule that your husband is the legal father and the bio father has no rights.

But I'm not an attorney so I can't guarantee that's the way things will go.

You also need to prepare all the evidence you can on the bio father's unfitness as a back up. If the judge rules for him, then you can probably force supervised visitation at least initially.

But I really think you should start off with by invoking 109.070 and claiming that your husband is the legal father and the its past the time to challenge that.

Good luck and keep us posted.


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

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.

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

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.

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.

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 BC.In this way there is no conclusive presumption that the husband is the legal father.
Second-the OP allows BF 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 BC.
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
] My husband and I are still together but he did not want to be on the birth certificate…. .to present all facts/
biological father found out about his son through a mutual acquaintance 10 months ago and since has demanded to see his son and trying to break up my marriage….I have documented all the times I have let him see his son…Through DNA testing it has been proven that he is the father but he is not on the birth certificate….The DNA test was done at DNA services of America and will hold up in court and this was performed under his BF wish.

(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]

Just to mediate this, I can see the positions both Cadillac and GV are taking. This is why we have lawyers and judges to interpret the written statutes. What this means to the OP is that a court will have to decide this based on the judges interpretation of the law. It also means, that while there is some room for optimism, you will be much better off having an attorney devise the best strategy for you.

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 BC.In this way there is no conclusive presumption that the husband is the legal father.
Second-the OP allows BF 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 BC.
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]

First I would like to thank you for the information that you have shared, I find it very helpful.
Correct me if I'm wrong please, but if I read the statues right then being that my husband and I were and are still married then he is considered the father and the BF does not have a case.? Does this apply if I have allowed the BF to see his once a week for 10 months. It is not that I'm trying to take my son out of his life as it is that I want full control and very little association so he cannot make any of his demands and threats on me and that my son is not influenced by his very dark way of life. Under what circumstances does he have a case against me in this situation. Does it help that I have documented his verbal abuse toward me along with violent outbreaks? Is there a date within the courts it may be thrown out because of it time relavence. I believe that the courts will look at his situation as stable because he lives with his mother who is very wealthy and a complete support for him.
Also- I tried looking online for the ors 109.070-072 and could not find anything that I could read that you quoted, where can I research it online?

Well, the problem here is that your husband is not on the because. If he were I think that 109.070 would directly apply. But As GV70 points out, 109.125 does give him a point of appeal.

Here's a link to Oregon chapter 109

Chapter 109 — Parent and Child Rights and Relationships (http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/109.html)

While we are talking about Oregon and not California, I fail to see how the husband not being on the birth certificate has any bearing on the fact that he was married to the mother when the child was born. Marriage can certainly be proven by means of other than the birth certificate and the Oregon statute does not mention birth certificates from what I've read. I do know that in California a husband could assert either the conclusive or non-conclusive presumptions of paternity even if not on the because. Maybe I missed something in reading the Oregon statute? It seems this view is based upon the opinion of an Oregon attorney that GV contacted, which is fine. But it would have been helpful had that lawyer actually cited a statute or case authority for the proposition because it seems odd.

If for any reason the Oregon lawyer might have been mistaken on this point (and I'm not saying he or she was) it would seem the husband has a presumption of paternity and the bio-dad does not. Oregon and California differ in that there appears not to be a time limit to challenge Oregon's conclusive marital presumption and it also seems husband and wife may consent to a 3rd party challenge. From what I can tell if either husband or wife objected to the bio-dad's assertion of paternity, I think bio-dad would lack standing to even go to court over the issue.

While we are talking about Oregon and not California, I fail to see how the husband not being on the birth certificate has any bearing on the fact that he was married to the mother when the child was born. Marriage can certainly be proven by means of other than the birth certificate and the Oregon statute does not mention birth certificates from what I've read. I do know that in California a husband could assert either the conclusive or non-conclusive presumptions of paternity even if not on the b/c. Maybe I missed something in reading the Oregon statute? It seems this view is based upon the opinion of an Oregon attorney that GV contacted, which is fine. But it would have been helpful had that lawyer actually cited a statute or case authority for the proposition because it seems odd.

If for any reason the Oregon lawyer might have been mistaken on this point (and I'm not saying he or she was) it would seem the husband has a presumption of paternity and the bio-dad does not. Oregon and California differ in that there appears not to be a time limit to challenge Oregon's conclusive marital presumption and it also seems husband and wife may consent to a 3rd party challenge. From what I can tell if either husband or wife objected to the bio-dad's assertion of paternity, I think bio-dad would lack standing to even go to court over the issue.

Thank you very much.

This is why we have lawyers and judges to interpret the written statutes. What this means to the OP is that a court will have to decide this based on the judges interpretation of the law.
WOW-here we are in agreement:)

ATTEMPT AT READING OREGON FAMILY LAW


Some States limit the time within which a parent may seek to establish Paternity. For example, in California, a husband only has 2 years to file a paternity action. Oregon does not have time limit. ORS 109.070 is the fundamental Oregon statute on determining paternity. Subsection one provides three principal means by which a man's status as a child's legal father can be established: 1) marriage to the child's mother, 2) judicial filiation proceedings, and 3) voluntary acknowledgments by the mother and alleged father.
ORS109.070(1) also includes a catchall provision allowing paternity to be established by “other provision of law.”
ORS 109.070(1)(a) provided that if a married
Woman and her husband were cohabiting when a child was conceived and the husband was not infertile, he was conclusively presumed to be the father of children born to her. Subsection (1)(b) of the statute provided that a married woman's husband was rebuttably presumed to be the father of her children born during the marriage.


While the conclusive presumption
Is no longer justified by lack of reliable evidence about biological parentage, it does protect married couples raising children who are not the husband's biological offspring from outsiders to the marriage who want to establish the husband's nonpaternity.

While the second presumption of paternity, which applied when
The parties were not living together at conception, could be rebutted.
Under existing Oregon law, a judgment of paternity is res judicata as to parties to the proceeding. ORCP 71(B) provides that a judgment procured by mistake, fraud, misrepresentation or other misconduct of an adverse party is an exception to general principles of res judicata If the evidence from properly conducted blood tests excluded the man as the child's biological father, the court was required to enter a finding of nonpaternity if it found that fraud had been committed.160 § 9(7).
If the court found no fraud, it was required to enter a finding of nonpaternity if the petitioner proved that the finding would not cause “undue harm to the child” and that 1) the legal father had not adopted the child, 2) the child was not conceived by artificial insemination while the legal father and the mother were married, 3) the petitioner had not acted to prevent the biological father from asserting his parental rights, and 4) the petitioner, with knowledge that the legal father was not the biological father, had not taken any action to affirm
The legal father's parentage of the child or failed to respond to a judicial or administrative proceeding to establish paternity after having received notice and been given an opportunity to be heard. § 9(7)(A)-(F).
The presumption of paternity may be challenged in court by the
Mother, her husband, or by a man alleging himself to be the child's biological father. The challenge must be brought within two years of the child's birth.The statute of limitations does not apply if the husband and wife did not cohabit or engage in sexual intercourse during the time that the child was probably conceived and if the husband never openly acknowledged the child as his UPA§ 607(b).
ORS 109.070(2)
The paternity of a child established by one of the presumptions
Based on marriage may be challenged in an action or proceeding
By the husband or wife. The paternity may not be challenged by a person other than the husband or wife as long as the husband and wife are married and cohabiting, unless the husband and wife consent to the challenge.The presumption
May be rebutted only by genetic test evidence, and only a court may order the tests;

Several of the existing statutes that together govern judicial proceedings to establish paternity were amended to prevent courts from entering paternity findings when another man is already presumed to be the father or has been established as the father by a voluntary acknowledgment.
These provisions 1) require that a petition to establish
Paternity name the mother's husband if another man is alleged to be the child's father
§ 109.125(2)
2) define a man whose paternity has been established
Under ORS 109.070 as a necessary party to the proceedings
Unless his paternity has previously been disestablished 2) define a man whose paternity has been established under ORS 109.070 as a necessary party to the proceedings
Unless his paternity has previously been disestablished§109.125(5)
And 3) preclude a court from entering a judgment establishing paternity in a filiation proceeding if another man's paternity has previously been established unless the judgment also disestablishes that paternity§ 109.155(7)
While these provisions help to solve the problem of conflicting determinations of legal paternity, they do not completely solve the problem. No statute prevents a mother and alleged father from signing a voluntary acknowledgment of paternity when another man is presumed to be or has been established as the child's father§ 109.070(1)Thus, it continues
To be possible for more than one man to be designated as a
Child's legal parent as, for example, when a married woman files a voluntary acknowledgment of paternity with a man who is not her husbandId. § 432.287(2)./This scenario assumes that the mother did not put her husband's name on the birth certificate./

Another hotly contested issue parallels one that arose regarding
The marital presumption: whether a judge should have discretion to
Reject a petition to set aside a judgment when genetic evidence shows
That the legal father is not the biological father.As with the marital
Presumption, the legislation gives judges discretion.
Judicial Discretion to Deny Petitions to Set Aside Paternity
As the discussion above explains, the new legislation takes the
Same approach to resolving the dispute about whether biological paternity should give way to other factors in determining legal paternity,regardless of how legal paternity is established. Ordinarily, evidence about biological paternity is admissible, and biology is the starting point for determining legal paternity. However, at every critical point,the judge has discretion to enter an order that will preclude biological evidence from being determinative:
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.
“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



I am not sure about Oregon but in Pennsylvania a mother is obligated to put her husband's name on her child's BC. If he did not put her husband's name, it is assumed that both she and her husband declare a sort of Denial of husband's paternity. It can be used for applying Res Judicata if a husband wants to avoid his obligations but it cannot stop a father to establish himself as a father of marital child.

Thanks for spending the time on this. Its looking better for the OP from what you posted. Especially the point that the bio father needs to bring an action within 2 years of the birth.

The one point that muddies the waters is the lack of the father's name on the because. But I think that is mitigated by the fact that the husband has raised the child as his own.

Thanks for spending the time on this. Its looking better for the OP from what you posted. Especially the point that the bio father needs to bring an action within 2 years of the birth.
No,it is about Ca.There is no time limit in Oregon


The one point that muddies the waters is the lack of the father's name on the b/c. But I think that is mitigated by the fact that the husband has raised the child as his own.
That's the main problem. The case can be viewed as a case "Biological father who wants rights and obligations versus step-father/husband/ who has never had intention to take legal responsibilities"
Another point muddled the waters is the fact that the BF is allowed to visit his child.

Here is the link that the OP has requested regarding 109.70 - 72

Relating to paternity; amending ORS 109.070. (http://www.leg.state.or.us/07reg/measures/hb2300.dir/hb2382.1ha.html)

Here is the link that the OP has requested regaurding 109.70 - 72

Relating to paternity; amending ORS 109.070. (http://www.leg.state.or.us/07reg/measures/hb2300.dir/hb2382.1ha.html)

Look above-Scott has already posted the link.

Look above-Scott has already posted the link.

Thank you I have looked at the link.

Are you nuts!? How can you say the bio dad is out? He can petition the courts for all the rights he wants and deserves being the child's father. Simply because he is not on the because does not preclude him from his fatherly rights under California law. I prepare custody modifications, motions all day long. I know. I also have a child whose father is not on the because, He has just as much rights as he would whether he is on her because or not. Both parents have rights. It is not easy to diminish a person's rights. You cannot even get a person to sign their rights away in Cal unless you have another person willing to adopt the child. Courts prefer both parents in their childrens' lives.

How can you say the bio dad is out? He can petition the courts for all the rights he wants and deserves being the child's father. Simply because he is not on the bc does not preclude him from his fatherly rights under California law.

If you, in fact prepare "custody modifications, motions all day long" then you should know that laws differ by area. The OP is not in California but in Oregon. The specific law in OR was cited earlier in the thread.

You are new here but before you start posting (and insulting people) you should take some time to see how this site operates. Normally I would just have removed your posts since they were posted to a thread more than 3 years old. Please check dates before posting. Also you should check the whole thread before posting. Maybe you didn't get as far as the specific cites before posting your incorrect advice. We pride ourselves on the accuracy of the advice given here so please be careful about checking your facts.