AB17: Bill Text

LRB-0366/1

PJK:kmg:pg

2003 - 2004 LEGISLATURE

2003 Assembly BILL 17

January 30, 2003 - Introduced by Representatives Wasserman, Gundrum, Ainsworth, Albers, Colon, Gronemus, Grothman, Kestell, F. Lasee, M. Lehman, Musser, Plouff, Seratti and Stone. Referred to Committee on Family Law.

AB17,1,3 An Act to amend 767.458 (1m) and 767.463 of the statutes; relating to: prohibiting the dismissal, in a childs best interest, of an action to rebut a presumption of paternity.

Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau

Under current law, a man who was married to the mother of a child when the child was born or conceived is presumed to be the father of the child. The man may bring an action to rebut that presumption. The presumption is rebutted if the results of genetic tests show that the husband is excluded as the father of the child or that another man is not excluded as the father of the child and the probability that the other man is the father is 99% or higher. Current law also provides that in a paternity action a judge or court commissioner may refuse to order genetic tests and dismiss the action if, upon the motion of a party or guardian ad litem, the judge or court commissioner determines that it is not in the child's best interest to determine whether a man is the child's father or that a man other than the mother's husband is the father.

This bill provides that, regardless of a child's best interest, a judge or court commissioner may not refuse to order genetic tests and may not dismiss a paternity action if the man who is presumed to be the father of the child because he is the mother's husband desires to rebut the presumption that he is the father.

The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do enact as follows:

AB17, s. 1 Section 1. 767.458 (1m) of the statutes is amended to read:

AB17,2,11 767.458 (1m) In an action to establish the paternity of a child who was born to a woman while she was married, where a man other than the woman's husband alleges that he, not the husband, is the child's father, a party may allege that a judicial determination that a man other than the husband is the father is not in the best interest of the child. If the court or a circuit or supplemental court commissioner under s. 757.675 (2) (g) determines that a judicial determination of whether a man other than the husband is the father is not in the best interest of the child, no genetic tests may be ordered and the action shall be dismissed. This subsection does not apply if the husband desires to rebut the presumption under s. 891.41 (1) that he is the father of the child.

AB17, s. 2 Section 2. 767.463 of the statutes is amended to read:

AB17,2,22 767.463 Dismissal if adjudication not in child's best interest. Except as provided in s. 767.458 (1m), at any time in an action to establish the paternity of a child, upon the motion of a party or guardian ad litem, the court or circuit or supplemental court commissioner under s. 757.675 (2) (g) may, with respect to a man, refuse to order genetic tests, if genetic tests have not yet been taken, and dismiss the action if the court or circuit or supplemental court commissioner determines that a judicial determination of whether the man is the father of the child is not in the best interest of the child. This section does not apply in an action in which a man who is presumed to be the father of the child under s. 891.41 (1) desires to rebut the presumption.

AB17,2,23 (End)