[jay366cee]

Hi,I just found out that I am the biological father of my 2 yr. old son through DNA testing.my son's legal father right now is his mother's ex live in partner.he just found out too that he's not the real father of my son.my son and the mom and the legal father is in New Jersey right now and I just moved here in California because of work.now, I want to change my son's last name to mine because I want to bring him here in California and live with me, with my parents and my sis and bro because the mom is going to lose her job and she doesn't have any savings and she doesn't have any relatives here in the united states.the mother and the legal father are illegal aliens here in the united states but the legal father has relatives here.the mom is cooperating with me but the legal father wants me to pay him $15000 for all the things that he spent for my son in 2 yrs and for lying to him that he was the father of my son in order for him to cooperate with us.but its not me who lied to him,the mother was the one who lied about it.I just found out too.so how can I possibly change my son's last name to mine and be the legal father without the legal father's cooperation?I have the copy of the DNA test result though.im really worried about my son and his future.someone help me p l e a s e

[babysaver]

I just want to make sure I am reading your post correctly. Your son's mom is okay with you moving him to CA?

[passmeby]

I think what he needs to know is now that he's been proven through DNA to be the father, does he have full paternal rights? Does this "other guy" have any rights anymore?

The "other guy" who was proven to not be the dad is demanding the father pay him $15,000 to take the child because he feels like he was duped into supporting a child that wasn't his, he feels that the real father owes him the money back. The mother isn't fighting it. Just this guy, who isn't the father.

I think what he needs to know is, does this guy have any rights over the child whatsoever? I think he might think he has rights because he has cared for the child and thought the child was his, but it turns out the child isn't his.

That's what I got out of it, anyway.

Strange story!

[this8384]

hi,i just found out that i am the biological father of my 2 yr. old son thru DNA testing.my son's legal father right now is his mother's ex live in partner.he just found out too that he's not the real father of my son.my son and the mom and the legal father is in new jersey right now and i just moved here in california coz of work.now, i want to change my son's last name to mine because i want to bring him here in california and live with me, wtih my parents and my sis and bro because the mom is going to lose her job and she doesn't have any savings and she doesn't have any relatives here in the united states.the mother and the legal father are illegal aliens here in the united states but the legal father has relatives here.the mom is cooperating with me but the legal father wants me to pay him $15000 for all the things that he spent for my son in 2 yrs and for lying to him that he was the father of my son in order for him to cooperate with us.but its not me who lied to him,the mother was the one who lied about it.i just found out too.so how can i possibly change my son's last name to mine and be the legal father without the legal father's cooperation?i have the copy of the DNA test result though.im really worried about my son and his future.someone help me p l e a s e

You need to file in court for custody and visitation rights. You are not the legal father until a court-ordered DNA test has been conducted; the test you took outside of court will not be admissible as proof that you are the child's father.

If the mother is okay with you moving the child, then this should be relatively easy.

The man who thought he was the father of the child has no legal recourse against you but he may against the mother if he can prove that she had doubts that he was the father and lied to him in order for him to support her and the child.

[passmeby]

Some DNA tests taken privately (outside of courts) ARE admissible, some aren't. Legal (admissable) DNA tests must have what's called a "chain of custody" for the sample collection-the samples are collected, stored and transported by officials certified to do so. It's possible that this person does have a legal DNA test even if he went about it outside of the courts. He should contact the agency that did the testing to know whether his test is admissible (if he doesn't already know).

A lot of people do DNA testing outside of the courts simply because they do not want the courts involved-usually for financial and custody reasons.

[this8384]

Some DNA tests taken privately (outside of courts) ARE admissable, some aren't. Legal (admissable) DNA tests must have what's called a "chain of custody" for the sample collection-the samples are collected, stored and transported by officials certified to do so. It's possible that this person does have a legal DNA test even if he went about it outside of the courts. He should contact the agency that did the testing to know whether or not his test is admissable (if he doesn't already know).

A lot of people do DNA testing outside of the courts simply because they do not want the courts involved-usually for financial and custody reasons.

And what do you have to back up this statement? I have never in my life seen a "home" DNA test stand up in court. It would be far too easy for people to lie and get the results that they wanted.

[passmeby]

No, not a "home" DNA test. As I said in my post, a "legal" admissible DNA test involves sample collection by officials certified to do so, and a "chain of custody" for the sample. A home DNA test can provide an answer, but it's not admissible. A "privately done" DNA test CAN be admissible as long as it is done within the law and has a legally acceptable "chain of custody" for the sample.

A simple Google search for DNA testing companies will provide you with numerous services that provide legal admissible DNA tests. Here is one link for you, if you want more just Google it and you will find many.

http://www.dnacenter.com/paternity/legal-testing.html

http://www.dna-testing-paternity.com...urt-admissible

http://www.mydnalab.com/court-admiss...na-testing.php

[this8384]

No, not a "home" DNA test. As I said in my post, a "legal" admissable DNA test involves sample collection by officials certified to do so, and a "chain of custody" for the sample. A home DNA test can provide an answer, but it's not admissable. A "privately done" DNA test CAN be admissable as long as it is done within the law and has a legally acceptable "chain of custody" for the sample.

... said the woman with a "troll" avatar.

And you still have yet to back up your statement that a DNA test done outside of court will be admissible.

[passmeby]

Link has been provided in the above post. Please re-check! Thanks.

Edit: I have provided even more links, see above. Just Google it if you still want more, there are numerous sources out there.

[this8384]

Link has been provided in the above post. Please re-check!! Thanks.

That says they give you proof that it's accurate. It doesn't mean it will hold up in court.

I could take any toddler in with me, hand them my daughter's birth certificate and say that the toddler is my daughter - there is no legal PROOF.

[this8384]

So let me get this straight: you are under the impression that the courts are going to waste the time and energy allowing an outside DNA test to be submitted when one of the parties could argue down the road that the test was tampered with and claim the results are not accurate, rather than just ordering a DNA test to begin with?

Why do you have such an incessant need to argue and try to prove that you're right? On nearly every legal thread you post on, it turns into childish bickering about why you think you're right and why everyone should stop picking on you. Enough is enough; admit you're wrong and stop already.

[passmeby]

I could take any toddler in with me, hand them my daughter's birth certificate and say that the toddler is my daughter - there is no legal PROOF.

Absolutely. But that is true for ANY situation, court-ordered or not, since babies/young kids typically do not have government-issued official picture ID's. Hence the guidelines for the "legal" smaple collection, which involves requiring a minimum of 2 forms of ID for everyone involved (SS cards, gov issue ID, birth certificates, passports etc), pictures are taken of all participants... and the "chain of custody" must be strictly adhered to in order to be considered "legal".

The courts will ALWAYS, ALWAYS retain the ability to demand that the DNA test be done through their channels, however provided the DNA test is done under the strict legal guidelines, it is typically accepted just the same as if it was done through the court. Thus the reason why in my posts I said "CAN be" and "some are, some aren't"... because even if done by legal standards, it can always be overridden by a judge and demanded that the parties take a court-ordered test. But generally that doesn't happen, usually a legally done private test is accepted.

[ScottGem]

Passmeby,

This is a continuing problem with your posts. You have enough knowledge to be dangerous. But you often don't fuly understand the reality of the court system.

Its one thing for a site to advertise that they can provide "legal" tests. Its another thing for a court to accept it.

The courts will ALWAYS, ALWAYS retain the ability to demand that the DNA test be done thru their channels, however provided the DNA test is done under the strict legal guidelines, it is typically accepted just the same as if it was done thru the court.

What is the likely scenario is for the judge to order a paternity test to be done when they accept the petition for custody. Even if the petitioner has had a test done at an accredited lab with the chain of evidence preserved. Since the test was not performed under court order, the court will still order their own test. What This is asking for is proof that a court has to accept a test not ordered by the court or that they will "typically" do so. If you can't provide such proof then stop arguing.

[ScottGem]

hi,i just found out that i am the biological father of my 2 yr. old son thru DNA testing.my son's legal father right now is his mother's ex live in partner.

You need to file a petition for custody in NJ where the child lives. Do not be concerned, right now, about the current legal father's blackmail (especially if you have proof of the demand). You still have to go to court to get things changed.

You don't say how you came about to take a test and where the test was taken, but the likelihood is the court will order a new test.

I would have to check NJ law, but if they are not married there is a good chance the courts will award you custody. I would strongly suggest you retain an attorney to help you properly prepare your case.

[passmeby]

If the OP isn't contesting paternity, which it doesn't sound like he is, then would the court really want to do another DNA test? It sounds like he wants to be the father, and he accepts the DNA results that he got, so can't he just sign an affidavit acknowledging he is the father and not have to go through the expense of getting another DNA test?

[cdad]

Link has been provided in the above post. Please re-check!! Thanks.

edit: I have provided even more links, see above. Just Google it if you still want more, there are numerous sources out there.

Ref: http://www.dna-testing-paternity.com...urt-admissible

This is from one of the sites you posted as a reference.
(quote):
Finally, in order to allow a motherless legal test, the father must prove with documentation that he is the legal father and guardian of the child who is authorized to sign on behalf of the minor child. Proof can be a birth certificate with the legal father's name on it or court documents showing custody and guardianship of the child.

(end quote)


What that means is that you already have to be the legal father. In a case like this that doesn't apply. In most cases where there is no signature on the Birth Certificate there is no established legal father. A child born unto a married couple still isn't the legal father until confirmed by a court but the are the "presumed" legal father.

The reason why its done like this is because although it is minamally invasive it is a medical procedure. And that's why the legal father or mother must consent.

So in a case like this the testing nomatter what heading is applied isn't going to hold up in court.

[ScottGem]

If the OP isn't contesting paternity, which it doesn't sound like he is, then would the court really want to do another DNA test? It sounds like he wants to be the father, and he accepts the DNA results that he got, so can't he just sign an affidavit acknowledging he is the father and not have to go thru the expense of getting another DNA test?

The court may pay for the test. The petitioner isn't always required to pay. Sometimes the services of local forensics labs are used.

But no, if the court won't accept the test results he received (as is likely) they will require a test be done.

[jay366cee]

I just want to make sure I am reading your post correctly. Your son's mom is okay with you moving him to CA?

Yea she's totally fine with it.

[Fr_Chuck]

To make this very simple, most courts have a list of approved labs that they will accept tests from, if the lab is not on the list, it will not be accepted,

Normally the requirements will be that proper ID was done for the persons being tested and specific paper work signed to state that they are the person being tested.

There is even a legal chain of evidence that has to be followed,

If the above is not done, it can be a great lab, but the test will not even be considered.

[jay366cee]

OK I get it.we didn't do the "LEGAL" one,we did the mailing thingy.the company sent us the materials and we did it ourselves and sent it back to the company.then after two weeks they emailed us and called us about the result.the legal father right now even did it too.but I'm not sure if it was the same company though.my DNA is positive and the legal father is negative.