The Attorney General\u2019s Office has reiterated its opposition to the passage of a bill that specifically lists DNA testing as an option in child support cases.<\/p>\n
In a June 7, 2004 letter to House Speaker Benigno Fitial, attorney general Pamela Brown said the bill, which the Senate chose to override recently, is \u201cflawed as to legal sufficiency.\u201d<\/p>\n
Brown cited that when approved, Senate 14-11 would actually further result in more confusion and \u201cvictimization of children by the legal system.\u201d<\/p>\n
She said the bill duplicates an already existing section of the Uniform Parentage Act, which gives the court an option to require genetic testing.<\/p>\n
She said the proposed measure also conflicts with 8 CMC 1412 as it appears to allow adopted children to claim child support from their natural parents. Under the law, natural parents are relieved of all parental responsibilities.<\/p>\n
Further, she said the bill\u2019s provision that says that \u201conly a person who is the parent of the child in a child support case is ordered to pay child support\u201d could be interpreted to prevent adoptive children from petitioning the court for child support from their adoptive parents, thus conflicting with the existing law.<\/p>\n
The attorney general said the bill could be read to require DNA testing before child support could be paid in all cases. This, she said, would further burden the already busy child support docket and delay resolution of child support cases.<\/p>\n
Brown said the bill, \u201cafter arguably mandating paternity testing prior to payment of child support, it does not state what would happen if the parties refuse the testing.\u201d Under the existing law, if a party refuses to comply with a court order, it could be held in contempt.<\/p>\n
The bill, on the other hand, leaves open to judicial interpretation the consequences for refusing DNA paternity testing.<\/p>\n
\u201cChild support law is complex. The child support cases, by their nature, are adversarial. This bill adds confusion and complexity to an area of law that is already convoluted,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
Sen. Pete Reyes, who authored the bill, managed to secure majority votes to override a veto made by Gov. Juan N. Babauta.<\/p>\n
The DNA bill received eight affirmative votes. Sen. Paul Manglona abstained. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Attorney General\u2019s Office has reiterated its opposition to the passage of a bill that specifically lists DNA testing as an option in child support cases.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-81863","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-local-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81863","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=81863"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/81863\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=81863"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=81863"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.saipantribune.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=81863"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}