THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT 
              Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: Wednesday, May 17, 1995                TAG: 9505170263
SECTION: FRONT                    PAGE: A10  EDITION: FINAL 
TYPE: Editorial 
                                             LENGTH: Short :   44 lines

DEADBEAT DADS MAKE SURE THEY'RE DADS

When does law catch up to science? Not soon enough for Federico L. Ampey. Not soon enough for the teenager who now learns that the man she has thought is her father is not. And not soon enough to ensure that the understandable zeal to crack down on deadbeat dads doesn't steamroll the guiltless.

For three years Mr. Ampey has been paying child support, as ordered by the court, for a child he has never thought was his. Finally he paid for a DNA test that proves he is not her parent. Yet the wheels of the justice system grind even more slowly in reverse, while its garnishment mechanism rolls mercilessly on.

As legislators on both the state and federal levels have belatedly acknowledged, establishing paternity is an essential element in tackling the record rise in unwed parenthood, and DNA testing is a useful tool. It is equally decisive in disestablishing fatherhood. And where there is doubt about paternity, DNA testing ought to be equally available. The underlying problems of reducing the incidence of unwed parenthood are legion. Here's an aspect of that social ill - identifying an unwed parent - which can be handled readily and decisively, and it ought to be handled just that way.

Yet past rulings in Virginia show a stubborn reluctance to reverse findings of fatherhood based on evidence far less conclusive than DNA. That same stubbornness shows up in other instances - serious instances, such as rape and death-penalty cases - in which DNA contradicts verdicts already given, but the procedures for handling new evidence are antiquated.

Do legislators need to amend state law to establish straightforward procedures for analyzing evidence that seems to disprove a prior ruling? Do judges need to be better informed on matters in which they may exercise great discretion? Probably both, and the sooner the better.

Mr. Ampey, it appears, has been wronged legally and financially. Those wrongs are bad enough. But those wrongs can be ended. The wrong done a teen deprived of both a father she does not know and the man she was told is her father is far harder to amend. by CNB