It is the right of the child to receive the financial support of his or her parents.
This truism is fundamental to our legal system in West Virginia. As this Court has frequently
recognized, and as the majority clearly states, the best interest of the child is the polar star
by which all matters affecting children must be guided. In 1993, we set forth the child's
rights regarding establishment of his or her paternity. In Syllabus Point 3 of Cleo A.E. v.
Rickie Gene E., 190 W.Va. 543, 438 S.E.2d 88 (1993), we stated, “A child has a right to an
establishment of paternity and a child support obligation, and a right to independent
representation on matters affecting his or her substantial rights and interests.” (See footnote 1)
Lives can be messy
- and this is especially true when relationships fail. A deep
overlay of intense emotions between adults in a failed relationship, particularly where
children are involved or where there is a sense of dishonesty or abandonment, may
sometimes overwhelm the legal consideration of child support issues in family law settings.
From these emotions, the litigants come to court with their own heartfelt subjective beliefs
of what each believes to be fair and, consequently, just. It may be accepted that a father may
feel an intense sense of emotional betrayal should he find out that he is not the biological
father of a child he believed himself to be. He may even wonder why he should be expected
to act in a responsible manner when his partner was deceptive. However, when it comes to
the right to support of a child where parental responsibilities have been assumed, the needs
of the innocent child should not fall prey to the intensity of the emotional upheaval between
the adults. Such a deep emotional wound should not be extended outside the adults'
relationship to be visited on the child. Fatherhood is more than genetics. It is precisely in
such emotional legal battles that the rule of law must stand resolute _ a measure of stability
and predictability. In this case, the parental duty of support should not nullified.
As technology develops, it is clear that those who seek a paternity test can find
one readily available. Paternity testing is now much less expensive than in the past.
Billboards herald quick, easy and affordable paternity determinations. Syndicated televisions
shows devote entire hours to whether someone is or is not a child's father. Drug and
convenience stores offer in-home paternity testing. The days of needing the state's blessing
and assistance to contest paternity are quickly passing. This ease of testing has led some to
advance the concept that a negative DNA test result should, itself, be sufficient to nullify a
child's right to support from the child's only known father. Such an argument is absurdly
simplistic. In this case, for example, DNA is one of many factors to be considered as we
weigh the rights and obligations of child support. In the balance of interests, we must always
be sensitive to the physical, financial and emotional well-being of the children involved.
In Michael K.T. v. Tina L.T., 182 W.Va. 399, 387 S.E.2d 866 (1989), we
established a procedure through which paternity results disproving paternity are to be
admitted into evidence. This case remains the guide by which attempts to disprove paternity
by an adjudicated father must be handled.
Our decision herein is one which, I believe, correctly sets forth the legal right
of a child to support from one who was _ and still is _ a legal parent. It does not seek to
reconcile the broader policy issues of the rights and responsibilities between adults in such
paternity cases; nor does it seek to sanction misrepresentation or betrayal in an adult
relationship. Those are matters for the Legislature to consider from a policy standpoint _ as
has been done in some other states. (See footnote 2) At some point, it may be appropriate for the Legislature
to provide statutory guidance for the individual adjudicated to be the father of a child who
later becomes aware from some type of testing that he is not the biological parent.