To: New Jersey Law Revision Commisison

MEMORANDUM

TO: NEW JERSEY LAW REVISION COMMISISON

FROM: JOHN M. CANNEL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

DATED: MAY 10, 2004

RE: NEW JERSEY PARENTAGE ACT

For about a year, there have been bills in the Legislature to change the New Jersey Parentage Act to facilitate the redetermination of parent-child relationships now that DNA evidence can almost always provide definite answers to biological parentage. The focus has been on biological parentage, not issues surrounding adoption or “children of the new biology.”

The New Jersey Parentage Act is based on an old Uniform Law. Its deficits will be obvious to you; it is the basis for the draft new law included with this memorandum. While all parties agree that the current law needs revision, there is a wide divergence of opinion in the Legislature on what should be done. On one end are those who say the issue of parentage should never be closed when new evidence surfaces that allows a court to establish the truth. One legislator said that the Jefferson estate should be reopened to recognize the claims of the Hemmings descendents. A current bill from that direction, but not that extreme, is S1232. Others in the Legislature would make formal acknowledgements of paternity by putative fathers binding on all parties and limit parentage reexaminations in other situations to a few years after birth. A current bill in that direction, again not that extreme, is S910 which enacts the current Uniform Law.

The Commission was asked to find a solution that could form a consensus among the various legislative groups. Subsequently, I was called and told that they needed a draft quickly. I produced the attached draft over the weekend and submitted it to the Office of the Senate Majority. They are fully aware that it is a staff draft that has not received any consideration by the Commission itself. I do not know what, if anything, has happened with this draft.

It is not clear whether there is a middle ground between the two legislative approaches. One group believes that the truth of the biological parent-child relationship is the preeminent consideration and that courts should be available to establish true relationships at any time. The other group believes that stability of relationships is the preeminent consideration; that a person who is acting as a parent and who has agreed to act as a parent should be considered as a parent for all purposes so the relationship between him and the child is not disturbed. The attached draft takes positions which are between those two extremes, sometimes siding with one group and sometimes the other. It often takes language directly from competing bills so as to emphasize its role as a compromise. Consider it for what it is, a first, rough attempt to do what may turn out to be impossible.

PARENTAGE ACT – MEMORANDUM MAY 10, 2004

/parentage act/paM051004.doc