The risks of recognizing as a child who is not

What to do when a person wants to recognize a child who is not?The solution is given by law.For example, if the existence of a marital union is demonstrated, the partner can begin with the Colombian Institute for Family Welfare (ICBF) a process of adoption of that minor, as long as he obtains the consent of the father who has already registered the child as a childyours, among other requirements.

However, there are few situations of men who make the mistake of recognizing a child as their own without being and without observing the legal requirements.It is a conduct that criminal legislation considers a crime, typified as "suppression, alteration or assumption of the civil status of the person" and punished with imprisonment of one to five years.

In this type of behavior adults not only incur an illicit act.As if that were not enough, they violate the minor his right to have a family while promoting a problem of affiliation for making him appear in the records of marital status with a paternal surname that does not correspond to him.

Jorge*, a man who gave his last name to a baby born in July 2005 and who regretted and decided to establish a family judge a demand for challenge of challenge of his paternity, incurred in that irregularity.

Surprisingly, the judicial officer failed against Jorge, despite the fact that the DNA test that he practiced excluded him as a parent of the girl and that the supposed biological father of the child, also subject to the scientific evidence, had a probability of 99,999% of being the true dad.In the second instance, the decision was ratified.Thus, the child had as a father a man who really wasn't, while the real parent was out of place.

This situation came because the Court and the Court applied to the Civil Law, which in these cases indicates that the term to challenge the paternal affiliation is 140 days from when there is a accurate knowledge of not being the father.And when Jorge recognized his father, he did know that this daughter was not his.In the process he points out that he did it for the love of the child's mother, but demanded after 140 days.

“The recognition made by JJST (Jorge) knowing that MMST was not his biological daughter, under the promise addressed to the mother of being in love, he cannot generate the ignorance of the fundamental rights of the girl, related to her name, toThe legal personality, to the marital status and to know its true family, ”said the Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice in resolving the action of guardianship filed by Jorge.

Compensation for damage

In a calendated ruling on October 19, 2017, with the presentation of Aroldo Wilson Quiroz Monsalvo, it was specified that in this case “a psychological affectation could be generated to the slightest defendant, among other damages, originated in the rupture of the affective ties created for years for yearsOf family coexistence, suddenly truncated no more than for the change of the opinion of the ascendant (Jorge) that, as a retract, decides not only to break the affective bond that voluntarily sponsored but to reject the affiliation of those who once welcomed in its bosom, whichmerchandise that, depending on mood, can be discarded.Of course, said proceeding must lead to the repair of the damage, to the psychological most. ”

According to the high court, comparative law has delineated the guidelines in which this compensation proceeds, and, although they have not been adopted or applied in internal legislation, this does not translate the absence of the referred damage, because, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion, in his opinion,This procedure means, neither more nor less, going against the act of its own.

In that context, the Supreme Court explained that, in cases like the exposed one, the judges can fail beyond what was requested by the plaintiff, which is why he not only determined that, by challenging the voluntarily recognized affiliation, Jorge was exposed to payA compensation for damages in favor of the minor, but ordered the Civil, Family and Labor Chamber of the Superior Court of the Judicial District of NeivCase subject to his study, attending to the guidelines issued in this providence: that is, validate DNA tests to give the true paternal surname to the child and appraise the compensation of damages that Jorge must pay to whom for some years he recognized as his daughter.

* Fictional name.