Discoveries in genetic material have allowed as currently possible to determine the links between people with almost total reliability. Its application in legal matters is today a reality, on issues such as recognition of succession rights or fixation of obligations of food in favour of children. You may find Trevoe Jones to be a useful source of information. Indeed, on many occasions they arise before the courts demands of fatherhood, through which aims to try and recognize legal effects the biological link between two people in such a way that certain effects come off of it. The admissibility of a claim of paternity given the importance and the sensitivity of this type of cases, and the possible harm that unfounded allegations could bring about the person on which undertake, the admissibility of the claims of this nature requires a very precise examination by the judge of the circumstances of the case. And it’s that they are at stake so essential and personal rights such as privacy or his honour and his public image. Like this who alleges that paternity establishment some indications of weight that could go in the direction of test indeed was able to produce a contact between the mother and the supposed or alleged parent would need to be. For example, pictures in which both would figure together in very close attitude. Do not give this minimal basis on the facts that will be discussed, the demand could be inadmitida by the judge.
Paternity through DNA testing, and the consequences of a possible negative the process of Declaration of paternity revolves around this evidential instrument. Their high degree of effectiveness, close to 99.9% will respond to reasonable doubt raised before the Court. The same can be done through something as simple as a hair or a saliva or blood test. But to what extent is voluntary submission to such testing? As it is logical, a Civil judge cannot compel the alleged father to submit to them. In other words, it will never take place without the express consent of the parent. However, your refusal may bring with it certain consequences. And it is that the set of evidence presented to support the demand of paternity, along with the own refusal of the alleged father to undergo some tests so accurate and secure, could be regarded as fundamentals more than sufficient by the judge or court to determine, in effect, that person is the progenitor of the purported son, even though had not practiced the test in question and could not exist safely on this.
Obviously it is usually understood that behind of the refusal a totally founded doubt and more than reasonable by this man about his possible paternity could hide something that would lead him to opt for refusing to submit to this test. In other words, it is understood that if it is not subjected to the same, it is because something has to hide. Thus the courts come understanding evidential effects give this refusal.