It's no wonder. Aside, from personal concerns, legally (and while we at H&Z practice divorce ONLY under Indiana law and therefore cannot advise as to what may occur in the state they have filed for divorce) – if these parties were divorcing in Indiana and there was no final dissolution by the time Kim was to give birth, under Indiana law the child would be presumed to be a child of the marriage. Thus, the basis to push for the finalization of the divorce prior to the child's birth. This is due to the law defining who is presumed to be a child's biological father. Under Indiana law, Kris would be presumed to be the child's father if:
(1) the child was born during the marriage; or
(2) the child was born not later than 300 days after the marriage is terminated by dissolution.
See Indiana Code Section 31-14-7-1.
Of course, this is a rebuttable presumption. However, under Indiana law, should the issue be left unaddressed, there could be implications affecting each party's rights. Namely, the presumption may lead to the right of either party to orders regarding child support and parenting time. While it may be unlikely for such an outcome to occur, this fact scenario is a prime example of an instance where the law leads to bizarre results.
For a full-text version of the article, please visit the following link:
At Roberts Means Roncevic Kapela, LLC Attorneys at Law, our team has the experience, the understanding, and the compassion to assist with your family law needs. If you have questions or concerns regarding divorce, custody, support, or any other family law concerns contact our firm at 317.DIVORCE or visit our website at www.hzlegal.com.