One of the presumptions is cohabitating with the mother when the child is
born.
So if a young woman gets pregnant and lives with her parents at the time of
child birth, the mother's father is presumed to be the child's father?
You've got to be kidding!
It could also be her little brother (still in grade school, btw..), her
Uncle, Grandfather, cousin, Step-father..
Hell, the man needn't even be among the living to be named the putative
father!
Exactly correct and perhaps this is the goal.
Phil #3
The way the wing-nut politicos behave toward anyone with too much
testosterone, while in their quest to appease the rad-fems of the world, not
even the wallets of the dead are to be left untouched!
"cohabitation with the mother at the time of the child's birth"
So a woman living with her brother makes the brother (uncle) the child's
father.
"recognition by a court that a person is the father of the child"
What else is new....
"marriage to the mother of the child at the time of birth"
So a same-sex "marriage" makes the other woman the father.
And then "balance of probabilities" to determine a man is the father? What,
are we tossin' dice now? Hurry, hurry, step right up. Spin the wheel and see
if YOU'RE a daddy.......
But wait a minute, isn't that what a DNA test is for? Oh, stupid me; I
forgot that DNA is used only to determine that a man IS the father. It is
not allowed to be used to exonerate an alleged father.
"Establishing parentage of a child upon the breakdown of a relationship is
important when determining custodial rights....".
Custodial "rights"? WHAT custodial rights?
Somebody PLEASE, help me escape the madness!