Our state Supreme Court is determining verdicts like this when they should force schools to find remedies for funding.
What this ruling basically says that if a potential father presents DNA evidence that he is not the father of a child(ren), he no longer has to pay child support. Previously, the law said that the father had a year or else they would be treated as the father.
I think that this is how it should be. I am a father that contributes to the well-being of my son...key word being MY son. I don't think that men should have to pay, under any circumstances, for someone else's child unless they choose to.