September 2014 | 126 P.3d 445, 34 Kan.App.2d 895 (Kan.App. 2006)
In re Parentage of Shade ex rel. Shade (Kansas 2006)
The presumption that a man is the father of a child if he notoriously or in writing recognizes paternity of the child must be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence or by a court decree establishing paternity of the child by another man. The stated purpose of the Kansas Parentage Act, K.S.A. § 38-1110 et seq., is to ensure that the legal obligations, rights, privileges, duties, and obligations incident to the father and child relationship are carried out. It is not in a child’s best interest to undermine the presumption of paternity absent any credible suggestion of paternity in another man. The bastardization of the child would achieve none of the purposes of the Act. While K.S.A. 2004 Supp. § 38-1121(e) permits the court to award all or part of the expenses of support and education of the child, it mandates that even if a portion of the expenses are awarded, the award must reflect expenses from at least the date the presumption first arose to the date the order is entered.
YoungWilliams does not endorse the reports or opinions expressed by non-YoungWilliams authors, nor do we endorse the entities that initially released or published the materials posted on our website.
