Senate Bill 158
Presumption and conclusive determination of paternity on the basis of genetic test results and orders that may be granted on the basis of genetic test results. (FE)
Became law
The governor signed it on Feb 6, 2020. It's .
-
Introduced, passed
Apr 11, 2019
-
Committee, passed
Approved
-
Senate vote, passed
Passed Oct 8, 2019
-
Assembly vote, passed
Passed Jan 21, 2020
-
Governor, passed
Signed
-
Law, here now
2019 Wisconsin Act 95
Latest entry in the official record, Feb 6, 2020: “Published 2-6-2020”
Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.
Terms on this page
Wisconsin Act
The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.
Official term: Act. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
What it does
Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.
This bill creates a new presumption of paternity and a new way to conclusively determine paternity under the law using genetic testing. The bill also generally requires the court in a paternity action to order genetic testing. Also, the bill allows a court that determines that a judicial determination of whether a man is the father of the child is not in the best interest of the child to dismiss the paternity action with respect to that man, regardless of whether genetic tests have already been performed or what the results of those genetic tests were.
Under current law, a court may adjudicate a man to be a child's father in a paternity action, or a man and a child's mother may sign and file a statement acknowledging paternity with the state registrar. Both cases result in a conclusive determination that the man is the child's father, and the state registrar may change the child's birth record to show the man as the child's father and a court may enter orders for child support, legal custody, and physical placement rights with respect to the man.
Read the full summary Show less
Under the bill, a man is conclusively determined to be a child's father if all of the following are satisfied: 1) genetic tests are performed with respect to the child, the child's mother, and the man in response to a subpoena issued by a county child support agency requiring the parties to submit to the tests; 2) the test results show that the man is not excluded as the father and the statistical probability that he is the father is 99 percent or higher; 3) both the mother and the man are at least 18 years old; and 4) there is no marriage or statement acknowledging paternity presumption. If all of those requirements are satisfied, the child support agency must send notice to the parties advising of the test results, that an action may be commenced for orders related to child support, legal custody, and physical placement, and that either party may submit to the child support agency a written objection to the test results. If either party submits an objection, the child support agency must commence a paternity action on behalf of the state and the test results are admissible in the action. If neither party submits an objection by the time specified in the notice, the child support agency must file with the state registrar a report of the test results, showing a conclusive determination of paternity. On the basis of the report, the state registrar must insert the name of the father on the child's original birth record if the father's name was omitted.
Under the bill, if genetic test results conclusively determine a man to be a child's father and neither the mother nor the man submits an objection after receiving notice, an action may be brought for child support, legal custody, and physical placement. The court may also require the man to pay or contribute to the reasonable expenses of the mother's pregnancy, require either the man or mother to pay or contribute to the other party's attorney fees, and change the child's name upon the request of one or both of the parties.
Current law also contains presumptions of paternity. There is a presumption (marriage presumption) that a man is the father of a child if: 1) he and the child's mother were married when the child was conceived or born; or 2) he and child's mother married after the child was born but had a relationship during the time within which the child was conceived and no other man has been adjudicated to be the father or is presumed to be the father because he was married to the child's mother when the child was conceived or born. There is also a presumption (statement acknowledging paternity presumption) that a man is a child's father if he and the child's mother signed and filed a statement acknowledging paternity with the state registrar and no other man is presumed to be the child's father under the marriage presumption. The bill creates a presumption that a man is a child's father if all of the requirements under the bill are satisfied for conclusively determining a man to be a child's father on the basis of genetic test results and no other man is presumed to be the child's father under the marriage or statement acknowledging paternity presumption.
The bill also makes other modifications related to genetic testing and paternity adjudications. Under current law, in a paternity action the court may require, and upon the request of a party must require, the child, the child's mother, and any male for whom there is probable cause to believe that he had sexual relations with the mother during the possible time of the child's conception to submit to genetic tests.
Under the bill, the court in a paternity action must require the child, the child's mother, and any male for whom there is probable cause to believe that he had sexual relations with the mother during the possible time of the child's conception to submit to genetic tests with the following exceptions:
1. Genetic tests are not required if the action will be dismissed or a default judgment will be entered because of the failure of a party to appear.
2. The court is not required to require any of the following persons to submit to genetic tests:
a. A person who was required by a child support agency to submit to a genetic test and who has done so.
b. The respondent in the action if he or she is deceased and genetic material is not available without undue hardship.
c. A male respondent who fails to appear if genetic test results with respect to another male show that the other male is not excluded as the father and that the statistical probability that the other male is the father is 99 percent or higher.
Current law includes an exception to the requirement to order genetic tests in a paternity action. If the court determines, upon the motion of a party or guardian ad litem, that a judicial determination of whether a male is the father of the child is not in the best interest of the child, the court may, with respect to the male, refuse to order genetic tests, if they haven't already been performed, and dismiss the action.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court, in Randy A.J. v. Norma I.J.
, 2004 WI 41, 270 Wis.
2d 384, 677 N.W. 2d 630, determined that a court may not dismiss the paternity action if genetic tests have already been performed, even if the court finds that a judicial determination of paternity is not in the child's best interest. The bill provides that if the court determines that a judicial determination of whether a male is the father of the child is not in the best interest of the child, the court may dismiss the action with respect to that male, regardless of whether genetic tests have been performed or what the results of those genetic tests were. The bill also provides that if, in fact, genetic tests have not yet been performed with respect to that male, the court is not required to order them.
Who's behind it
7 senators are its . 4 are Republicans and 3 are Democrats.
11 more lawmakers .
See all 18 names Hide the names
Authors (7)
- Kathleen Bernier · Republican, Senate
- Janet Bewley · Democrat, Senate
- André Jacque · Republican, Senate
- Dale Kooyenga · Republican, Senate
- Lena Taylor · Democrat, Senate
- Patrick Testin · Republican, Senate
- Bob Wirch · Democrat, Senate
Signed on in support (11)
- Janel Brandtjen · Republican, Assembly
- David Crowley · Democrat, Assembly
- Joel Kitchens · Republican, Assembly
- Scott Krug · Republican, Assembly
- Bob Kulp · Republican, Assembly
- Jeff Mursau · Republican, Assembly
- Ken Skowronski · Republican, Assembly
- John Spiros · Republican, Assembly
- Lisa Subeck · Democrat, Assembly
- Ron Tusler · Republican, Assembly
- Nancy VanderMeer · Republican, Assembly
What it would cost
State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.
How lawmakers voted
There was one vote on this bill.
Senate Committee on Universities vote to recommend it
Passed, 7 to 0 · Sep 30, 2019
No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Official motion: “Report passage recommended by Committee on Universities, Technical Colleges, Children and Families, Ayes 7, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page
What happened
-
Feb 6, 2020
The new law was published.
-
Feb 6, 2020
The governor signed it. It became 2019 Wisconsin Act 95.
-
Feb 3, 2020
Sent to the governor.
-
Jan 21, 2020
The Assembly passed it too.
-
Jan 16, 2020
Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.
-
Oct 8, 2019
The Assembly received it.
-
Oct 8, 2019
The Senate passed it.
-
Sep 30, 2019
The committee voted to recommend passing it, 7 to 0.
-
Aug 27, 2019
The committee held a public hearing.
-
Jun 10, 2019
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
May 10, 2019
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Apr 30, 2019
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Apr 24, 2019
A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.
-
Apr 11, 2019
Sent to the Senate Committee on Universities, Technical Colleges, Children and Families.
-
Apr 11, 2019
Introduced in the Senate.
See the official record, word for word Hide the official record
- Apr 11, 2019 · Senate
Introduced by Senators Testin, L. Taylor, Bernier, Bewley, Jacque, Kooyenga and Wirch; cosponsored by Representatives Krug, Subeck, Brandtjen, Crowley, Kitchens, Kulp, Mursau, Spiros, Skowronski, Tusler and VanderMeer
- Apr 11, 2019 · Senate
Read first time and referred to Committee on Universities, Technical Colleges, Children and Families
- Apr 24, 2019 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Apr 30, 2019 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- May 10, 2019 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Jun 10, 2019 · Senate
Fiscal estimate received
- Aug 27, 2019 · Senate
Public hearing held
- Sep 25, 2019 · Senate
Executive action taken
- Sep 30, 2019 · Senate
Report passage recommended by Committee on Universities, Technical Colleges, Children and Families, Ayes 7, Noes 0
- Sep 30, 2019 · Senate
Available for scheduling
- Oct 4, 2019 · Senate
Placed on calendar 10-8-2019 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)
- Oct 8, 2019 · Senate
Read a second time
- Oct 8, 2019 · Senate
Ordered to a third reading
- Oct 8, 2019 · Senate
Rules suspended
- Oct 8, 2019 · Senate
Read a third time and passed
- Oct 8, 2019 · Senate
Ordered immediately messaged
- Oct 8, 2019 · Assembly
Received from Senate
- Jan 16, 2020 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to committee on Rules
- Jan 16, 2020 · Assembly
Placed on calendar 1-21-2020 by Committee on Rules
- Jan 21, 2020 · Assembly
Read a second time
- Jan 21, 2020 · Assembly
Ordered to a third reading
- Jan 21, 2020 · Assembly
Rules suspended
- Jan 21, 2020 · Assembly
Read a third time and concurred in
- Jan 21, 2020 · Assembly
Ordered immediately messaged
- Jan 22, 2020 · Senate
Received from Assembly concurred in
- Jan 27, 2020 · Senate
Report correctly enrolled
- Feb 3, 2020 · Senate
Presented to the Governor on 2-3-2020
- Feb 6, 2020 · Senate
Report approved by the Governor on 2-5-2020. 2019 Wisconsin Act 95
- Feb 6, 2020 · Senate
Published 2-6-2020
Terms on this page
Wisconsin Act
The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.
Official term: Act. More in the glossary
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary
Author
A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.
Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary
From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source
Wisconsin Act
The number a bill gets when it becomes law, like 2025 Wisconsin Act 12.
Official term: Act
Legislative Reference Bureau
The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.
Official term: LRB analysis
Signed on in support
Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.
Official term: Cosponsor
Cost estimate
A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.
Official term: Fiscal estimate
Roll call
A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.
Official term: Roll call vote