LD 1851
pg. 17
Page 16 of 90 An Act To Implement the Recommendations of the Family Law Advisory Commission w... Page 18 of 90
Download Bill Text
LR 2675
Item 1

 
All presumptions of paternity are rebuttable in appropriate
circumstances. Uniform Parentage Act (1973), Prefatory Note, 9B
U.L.A. 379 (2001).

 
After amendments adopted in 2002, the Uniform Parentage Act
retains all but one of the original presumptions of paternity
contained in UPA § 4 (1973). Originally the 2000 version of the
new Act limited presumptions of paternity to those related to
marriage. The objection by the ABA Steering Committee on the
Unmet Legal Needs of Children and the Section of Individual
Rights and Responsibilities that this could result in
differential treatment of children born to unmarried parents
resulted in the revision to this section.

 
Subsection (1) deals with a child born during a marriage;
subsection (2) deals with a child conceived during marriage but
born after its termination; subsection (3) deals with a child
conceived or born during an invalid marriage; and, subsection (4)
deals with a child born before a valid or invalid marriage,
accompanied by other facts indicating the husband is the father.

 
Added by amendment in 2002, subsection (5), is a significant
revision of UPA § 4(4) (1973), which created a presumption of
paternity if a man "receives the child into his home and openly
holds out the child as his natural child." Because there was no
time frame specified in the 1973 act, the language fostered
uncertainty about whether the presumption could arise if the
receipt of the child into the man's home occurred for a short
time or took place long after the child's birth. To more fully
serve the goal of treating nonmarital and marital children
equally, the "holding out" presumption is restored, subject to an
express durational requirement that the man reside with the child
for the first two years of the child's life. This mirrors the
presumption applied to a married man established by § 607, infra.
Once this presumption arises, it is subject to attack only under
the limited circumstances set forth in § 607 for challenging a
marital presumption, and is similarly subject to the estoppel
principles of § 608.

 
One presumption found in UPA (1973) is not repeated in the new
Act. Former UPA §4(5) created a presumption of paternity if the
man "acknowledges his paternity of the child in a writing filed
with [named agency] [and] the mother does not dispute the
acknowledgment within a reasonable time." This presumption was
eliminated because it conflicts with Article 3, Voluntary
Acknowledgment of Paternity, under which a valid acknowledgment
establishes paternity rather than a presumption of paternity.

 
Finally, subsection (b) is a complete rewrite of UPA (1973) §
4(b). The requirement that a presumption "may be rebutted only


Page 16 of 90 Top of Page Page 18 of 90