Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Social Services
 
Board
State Board of Social Services
 
chapter
Virginia Independence Program [22 VAC 40 ‑ 35]
Action Amend the Virginia Independence Program regulation by updating out-dated information and changing paternity identification requirements.
Stage Proposed
Comment Period Ended on 12/12/2008
spacer

1 comments

All comments for this forum
Back to List of Comments
11/30/08  1:20 pm
Commenter: Marie D Popiolek

Recommend changes
 

SECTION:
22VAC40-35-20
Part II
Eligibility Requirements
22VAC40-35-20. Cooperation in obtaining support.


RECOMMENDATION:
PARAGRAPH A. 1.

Strike "If the applicant or recipient is not certain of the child''s paternity, he shall identify all individuals with whom the mother had sexual intercourse who may be the father." from the text.

REASONING:
It appears from text that the purpose is to Identify the parent(s) of the child.

The recommended stricken portion does nothing to reinforce this purpose.

This language is also potentially derogatory as it assumes women always have multiple partners, and could allow the womans reputation to be defamed.

It is not clear if the additional names are provided under penalty of perjury.

It does not take in to account artificial incemination and the acceptance/rejection of the donated sperm/ova as the parent's own.


RECOMMENDATION:
RENUMBER PARAGRAPHS 2., 3., and 4. to 3., 4., and 5. respectively.

Insert paragraph A. 2. as follows:

2. In cases of artificial insemination, or alternative procreation, provided all supporting documentation.

REASONING:
It recognizes artificial incemination and allows consideration of documentation substantiating the acceptance/rejection of the donated sperm/ova.

(See also http://www.ehow.com/how_17538_understand-legal-ramifications.html for additional insight)


RECOMMENDATION:
PARAGRAPH C.

Strike "If the parent is unsure of the identity of the father of the child, she is to name all potential persons who may be the father of the child." from the text.

REASONING:
It appears from text that the purpose is to limit the the expences of the Division of CHild Enforcement.

The recommended stricken portion does nothing to reinforce this purpose.

This language is also potentially derogatory as it assumes women always have multiple partners, and could allow the womans reputation to be defamed.

CommentID: 5857