H.B. 208 Parentage Amendments: transcript

House Judiciary Committee, Feb 19, 2026

1. Committee chair (presiding)57:00

   Um, HB 2 0 8 parentage Amendments by Representative Watkins. Representative Watkins. Welcome.

2. Rep. Christine F. Watkins57:09

   Thank you, Mr. Chair. Oh, sorry. That's on. There we go. Thank you Mr. Chair. Vice Chair Committee. Lovely, icy, snowy morning, which we all were wanting. Uh, I'm gonna tell you the story behind this bill, uh, as to what got it going. Uh, this last summer had a constituent call and her son-in-law received a letter from ORS saying that he, uh, a woman was claiming that he was the father of her child, and, um, that they would do the DNA testing and all that kind of stuff. But, and if he was, um, the, the mother was requesting child support. And the interesting part about this that was the child was 15, and so he had no idea that he had a child out there. He was not married at the time, he is now married, has a family. And, uh, and he was the father. And so, and, and right now ORS does not go back. Um, so he is, is doing that, but we wanted to make sure, uh, that, um, at first we thought that they would go back four years, so he'd be paying the back four years of child support or forever along or whatever, plus now, which ORS does not. So, um, thank goodness they had have their heads straight in in doing that. So in, but in the process of this, um, the drafting attorney checked around to see how things are done, kind of in the states around us. Um, they do that with a lot of, of, a lot of the bills and stuff. So, um, she found out some interesting things. We talked about it and, um, decided to go ahead with this because, um, sometimes a child doesn't know who their father is, uh, or they find out before they're 18 or after they're 18. And sometimes those fathers want to know and sometimes they don't. And the case that I told you, um, they did not want to ever see the father. They didn't wanna have any contact with him. They just wanted money. And, um, that kinda irks me that they weren't, they would've not allowed any, any kind of relationship there. So, um, if you go, uh, into line 56, it says, uh, a person may only bring a proceeding to adjudicate parentage of a child, uh, before the child is 18 years old. And for a child who is born on or after May 6th, 2026, the child only, um, may bring, uh, a proceeding to adjudicate the child's parentage before the child is 26 years old. And for a child who is born before, uh, May, 2026 or May 6th, 2026, the child may only bring a proceeding, um, to adjudicate the child's parentage within the latter of the child reaching 26 years old, three years after May 6th. And then it, it talks about, it does not prevent the birth mother and the father, uh, from, uh, signing a declaration of paternity or, um, applying to a proceeding to challenge a, uh, a declaration of, of, um, paternity. So, um, and then you go down and line 75, uh, a man, a birth mother or a child support services agency may raise the parentage of a child at any time before filing an action for divorce or in the pleadings at the time of the divorce of the man and the birth mother, if it the child was conceived or born during a marriage. So it talks about that and the man is presumed to be the father. So, uh, and right now it, we have, and I'm trying to remember where it is, um, oh, uh, line 37 right now in our laws, uh, if parentage action is brought under this chapter, this particular chapter, uh, the liabilities of past support are limited to four years. I wanted it to be one. I just feel like going back four years and then also paying child support at the same time, um, is pretty, a pretty heavy duty thing for a family, especially, um, when the mother, when there was, uh, they never told the father. And, um, so that's basically the bill puts us more in line with what the other states around us. Um, so thank you, Mr. Vice Chair.

3. Committee chair (presiding)1:01:43

   You got, you got it. Does that conclude your presentation?

4. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:01:45

   Yes. And I'm not seeing any substitutes online or amendments.

5. Committee chair (presiding)1:01:48

   Yep. Alright, we'll go back to the committee for discussion on the bill and clarifying questions. Representative er.

6. Unknown speaker1:01:54speaker not certain

   Yeah. Thank you. Um, something I've been, I've been thinking about this and thinking about why someone would wait to contact, and I think there's a lot of different reasons, but I think one of them, and especially for then asked gain for, um, child support would be say, this single mother has been trying to raise the kid alone for however, however long, and then circumstances change in her life where she cannot anymore. And does that, you know, take away the, the father's, um, duty to take care of his own, you know, offspring. So, um, that's one of the things that I think is protected in the bill or the law that we have at as right now. It It is, it is, we're not messing with that particular part of law.

7. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:02:43

   If the story I told you, he is paying child support and once it was established that he was the father, no way of sand or buts, you, you start paying child support. So, yeah, I just mean going back, I mean, there's, there's a long time where people might try to struggle for a while until they will admit, you know what, I Actually need help. Well, even with what we have now, you don't go back. This is kind of in a, in a different circumstance.

8. Unknown speaker1:03:08speaker not certain

   Oh, maybe you can explain what that means then for taking away.

9. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:03:11

   So like four years To One year. This, This is where, um, in this one, if, uh, as you'll read on 36, if a parenting parentage action is brought under this chapter, this particular chapter, there's other chapters too. And they do protect that, but they don't go back. This is a little bit different circumstance. I wish I had my drafting attorney right here by me, and they would maybe explain that a little bit better. 'cause we did this during the summer. But, um, and, uh, but in this case that I told you about, and if, if somebody did it tomorrow, um, they don't go back. ORS doesn't go back. And so, and, and I don't know why I even texted her this morning. I said, remind me why, why we did this in here, and, um, because in this particular chapter it says four years. And I said, let's just go back one. So, so Yeah. So

10. Unknown speaker1:04:08speaker not certain

    four years of what then child Support? Yeah. So

11. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:04:11

    in this, in this particular chapter when it's divorce and involving that kind of stuff.

12. Unknown speaker1:04:17speaker not certain

    Right. Okay. And then, um, okay, so this is only involving divorce In this, in this particular chapter, which is, um, uh, parent, um, when the parented action is brought.

13. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:04:31

    And I don't, I wish I had her here in the case that I told you about, he did not have to go back four years. He just started once that action, once she applied and they established that he was the father, it started, then he did. ORS does not go back. Some states do, but, and in this particular chapter, we, it said in this part of the law, it said four years. And I just said, let's just go one. So I I, I, without her here, I can't explain that exactly.

14. Unknown speaker1:05:04speaker not certain

    Okay. So maybe I misunderstanding, maybe I missed it. Um, so your story was someone got divorced and then brought No. Okay. No. So I'm just trying to figure out the divorce. Right. They Just had a nice stand 15, 16 years ago. So that makes sense. So I guess I don't know what this is Coming to do with divorce then.

15. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:05:20

    And one's talking a little bit more about divorce and, and if, uh, it talked a little, it talks about, uh, the, they can do a declaration of paternity, uh, during, uh, when they talk about a divorce. So if I had my drafting attorney here, which I don't Okay. I might be able to explain, because I even asked her this morning and she says, oh, she just said, oh, you wanted one year instead of four, but we did this during the summer and I have forgotten. So I apologize.

16. Unknown speaker1:05:49speaker not certain

    I see. Okay. Well, I I have one more question maybe then. Okay. Um, or maybe just one more comment, I guess. Um, I know in the story it was, he had no idea and they were like, we want child support, but we don't care about you having any visitation. I mean, just because they say that doesn't mean that he can't then also bring

17. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:06:10

    No, they actually can go to court and stop that. They could. And so, and, but this has been, this is so long, so far down the road, and he's now married. Right. There was no inclination.

18. Unknown speaker1:06:22speaker not certain

    And but some people may, and then they would end, then they would end up in court,

19. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:06:27

    Right? Yeah. But in this case, he just said, no, I, I agree with you. We don't, we don't want to have anything to do. I'll just write out the check until this child is 18.

20. Unknown speaker1:06:36speaker not certain

    Right. I'm just saying in a situation where maybe, uh, a similar, um, claim had been made that just because a birth mom, uh, would say that they don't want any contact, that doesn't mean it takes away the father's rights. And so, you know, using that as, you know, he didn't know. And now they say they just want money, but he can't have any contact. Like they don't have any control of that. And so He would have to go to court. Right. He would have to go to court. Yeah.

21. Unknown speaker1:07:04speaker not certain

    And of course, um, it's 15-year-old girl, she didn't even know. She probably may not know. It may be just the birth mother is saying. And, and the interest, I will say the interesting part to this case is because she made a lot of money, he didn't, his child support was reduced because the mother already made a lot of money. Yeah. So it was not like that she was in dire circumstances. And that's just This case. Well, I mean, that's it for the course to decide how much someone needs to take care of their own kid, but, okay.

22. Unknown speaker1:07:35speaker not certain

    Thank you. Mm-hmm.

23. Committee chair (presiding)1:07:37

    Thank you representative. Er, we'll go to Representative Acton for, um, further question.

24. Rep. Anthony Acton1:07:42

    Thank you. I'm wondering about this, the age 26, the child can be up to age 26. Mm-hmm. Now, is that, can they go back and collect some sort of text?

25. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:07:52

    Oh, no. Uhuh. So it, That's To establish parents only to 18. But this is just to establish, oh, you are my dad And I, I did not know that a child could ask. And that's already in the law that They Yeah. That's in here. That They can mm-hmm. They can get a, A fraternity. Yeah. Some men, um, after so long, they, they don't want to be found. They don't even know, and they don't want to be found. Right. I

26. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton1:08:18

    Just didn't realize the child had the right to demand such a thing as a paternity test. There's, there's things out there. They may come along and say, you are my dad. I do want inheritance. I do want all of these things. Doesn't mean they get it. Right. There's, there's a lot of legal, uh, ramifications here. So, but Okay. Thank you.

27. Committee chair (presiding)1:08:41

    Thank you. Representative Acton. Representative officer. Do you have another question or is that for Okay, perfect. We'll, seeing no further

28. Committee chair (presiding)1:08:48

    clarifying questions, we'll go to the public. Is there anyone in the room who'd like to speak to this legislation? I'm not seeing anyone. Is there anyone online? Okay. No one online. We'll come back to the committee

29. Committee chair (presiding)1:08:58

    for action on HB 2 0 8 pq, the Jeopardy Music Representative Miller. Um, and we have no substitute on the bill.

30. Rep. Tracy Miller1:09:23

    No, uh, I, uh, move that we, uh, favorably recommend, uh, house bill, uh, sorry, is it 3 0 8? 2 0 8? 2 0 8, uh, to the house floor for their consideration.

31. Committee chair (presiding)1:09:40

    That motion's in order. Representative Miller, would you like to

32. Rep. Tracy Miller1:09:42

    speak to that? I'll

33. Committee chair (presiding)1:09:42

    Waive, We'll come back to the sponsor of the legislation on the motion to favorably recommend.

34. Rep. Christine F. Watkins1:09:49

    Thank you. Um, if you do pass it out, I will clarify the, the four years and get ahold of each before it goes to the floor, if, if you choose to do that.

35. Committee chair (presiding)1:10:01

    Thank you. Representative Watkins committee discussion to the motion to favorably recommend not seeing any back to the sponsor of the motion Representative Miller.

36. Rep. Tracy Miller1:10:12

    I'll wave. Double wave. Double Wave. All

37. Committee chair (presiding)1:10:15

    right. Well, that, that motion, that double wave is in order. Um, we'll go ahead and do a roll call. Vote. Uh, uh, Jennifer, if that's okay. The motion in front of us is to favorably recommend House Bill 2 0 8 parentage amendments from Representative Watkins out of the, uh, committee and onto the full, uh, floor of the house.

38. Committee chair (presiding)1:10:38

    Good. There we go. Sorry, Representative Abbott. Aye. Acton? No. Oxia, no gracious. No. Lube? Yes. Manga? No. Millard? Yes. Thompson? No. Liz and B? No. And Clancy? Yes.

39. Committee chair (presiding)1:11:09

    Okay. I, I rule, I rule that Motion fails four to six with representatives, Clancy Lube, Millard and Abbott voting.

40. Unknown speaker1:11:22speaker not certain

    Aye. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair.

41. Committee chair (presiding)1:11:25

    Thank you, Representative Watkins. We'll go to the first item on our agenda