By Dianna Thompson
Special To The Examiner
IT'S HARD to feel sorry for a billionaire whose ex-wife
asks for $320,000 a month in child support, even when DNA evidence proves he is not the
father. After all, what is $320,000 to Kirk Kerkorian, the 46th richest man in the world?
But the real injustice facing the MGM mogul, and many men of
much lesser means, is that no matter how much evidence he offers refuting paternity -- DNA
tests, proof of his sterility -- California's legal system offers little hope that the
truth will prevail.
The most credible evidence to refute paternity would be a DNA
test, offering a 99.9 percent certainty of whether a man fathered a child. Even though DNA
evidence has been used to free those falsely convicted of murder and other serious crimes,
courts are slow to accept it as proof that a man should not have to pay child support.
Although this defies conventional wisdom, the "presumption
of paternity" is a longstanding legal principle. This tenet of common law states that
unless a man can prove that he is sterile or impotent, or was away from home at the time
of conception, he is the legal father of any child born to his wife during their marriage.
The Romans first adopted this rule, and later, the English incorporated it.
Instead of acknowledging near-perfect proof of a child's
paternity, courts in most of the 50 states rely on 500-year-old English common law,
promulgating an epidemic of paternity fraud. Because none of the 50 states requires a
mother who files a claim for child support to advise the court and child-support agencies
when another man could potentially be the father, thousands of men are paying support for
children that may not be theirs.
Many states have opted to look the other way when it comes to
adopting legislation against paternity fraud. Only Maryland and Ohio allow men unlimited
time to challenge paternity using DNA testing. A Georgia paternity fraud bill now awaits
the governor's signature.
Other states have addressed the problem by limiting paternity
challenges: Iowa allows a maximum of three years for such challenges, Colorado allows 5,
and Louisiana, 10. None of these states requires mothers make full and accurate disclosure
of potential paternity disputes within the time limits.
IN CONTRAST, Los Angeles County fails flagrantly in assuring
only men who fathered children pay child support. In 2000, more than 79 percent of L.A.
County paternity judgments were assigned by default, meaning that the suspected father
never had his day in court. Worse, once a judgment is established, it is difficult, if not
impossible, to remove.
In his best-selling book "Bias," Bernard Goldberg
chronicles the inner workings of the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office and its
efforts at obtaining paternity collections. According to Goldberg, then-District Attorney
Gil Garcetti obtained default judgments of paternity after failing to notify
"fathers" of court hearings. Once the court established paternity, Garcetti
refused to rescind judgments against men who later proved through DNA evidence that they
were not the fathers.
The case of Kerkorian and his ex-wife, Lisa, illustrates the
absurdities of paternity findings:
ï If DNA proof cannot clear a man's name, what will?
ï Should any man, rich or poor, be legally and financially
responsible for a child that is not biologically his?
ï Do children have the right to know the identity of their
biological fathers?
ï Shouldn't courts hold mothers accountable when they make
false statements regarding paternity?
The emotional nature of the issue clouds the patent reality
that paternity fraud is a crime and must be treated as such.
In 1999 alone, almost 30 percent of 280,000 paternity cases
evaluated by the American Association of Blood Banks excluded the tested individual as the
biological father. Today, the California Legislature is considering a bill that would
correct this injustice. The California Paternity Justice Act of 2002 (Assembly Bill 2240)
would require DNA testing in cases of disputed paternity.
Sadly, the nearly 84,000 children who in 1999 learned their
alleged fathers were not related are not alone. While bills such as AB 2240 do little to
bring peace to these children and their families, they bring them closer to two goals that
are equally noble: truth and justice.
Dianna Thompson is a nationally recognized expert on
families and divorce-related issues. She serves as executive director of the American
Coalition for Fathers & Children and may be reached by e-mail at dthompson2232@aol.com.