Lawmakers hear testimony on expanding grounds to challenge voluntary paternity acknowledgments

Jason Thompson, office of reviser of statutes, briefed House Bill 26 51, explaining the bill would amend the Kansas Parentage Act (KSA 23-2204) to authorize challenges to voluntary acknowledgments of paternity after the ordinary 60‑day window in cases of fraud, duress or material mistake of fact and to treat genetic testing results as a material mistake of fact that may extend the challenge period.

Representative Tom Kessler and several private citizens recounted personal cases. Jason Sewell described signing a voluntary acknowledgment at the hospital without reading it, learning years later through DNA testing that he was not the biological father, and encountering legal and financial barriers (including the cost of counsel and rules that impeded appeals). "I was under a child support order right now, all for a child that's not mine," Sewell said.

Garrett Tillery described being named the father at 17, obtaining notarized DNA showing he was not the father and facing DCF child‑support actions despite evidence. Both men and other proponents asked lawmakers to address statutory deadlines and the practical barriers to relief.

Marcelyn Martinez, director for child support services at the Kansas Department for Children and Families, testified as neutral. Martinez said DCF is concerned about retroactivity and whether a successful challenge would require repayment of previously paid support; she also noted KSA 23-2209 contains a one‑year time limitation that may need amendment.

Committee members asked technical questions about retroactivity, appeal bonds, potential repayment obligations and whether municipal practice changes were in effect for other bills heard that day. The reviser suggested limiting retroactivity or using a discovery‑based window if the committee wanted to reduce exposure.

The chair closed the hearing after taking testimony from proponents and neutrals; no opponents appeared during the session.