SB 36 creates a new criminal offense called “parentage fraud” in Kentucky law. A person would commit the offense if they try to legally establish someone else as the biological parent of a child in their custody, with the intent to deprive another person of property or to stop the child’s actual biological parent from exercising parental rights, and if they know or reasonably should know that the person is not the child’s biological parent.
The bill also sets out exceptions. It would not apply to children conceived through rape or incest, to children who have been adopted or are in the process of being adopted, or when the victim was the defendant’s spouse at the time of the offense. A violation would be classified as a Class B misdemeanor.
Impact
SB 36 would add a new section to KRS Chapter 530, expanding Kentucky’s criminal code to address fraudulent attempts to misstate parentage in legal proceedings. It would create potential misdemeanor liability for conduct tied to custody disputes, property-related motives, and interference with a biological parent’s rights, while carving out specific family-law and sexual-assault-related exceptions. The bill would primarily affect parents, custodians, and parties involved in paternity or parentage determinations, as well as courts handling those disputes.
Sentiment
There is limited recorded discussion or voting history available for SB 36, so the overall sentiment cannot be measured from committee debate. Based on the bill’s introduction and referral, it appears to have been presented as a targeted criminal-law measure rather than a broad policy overhaul. The absence of recorded opposition or support in the available materials suggests the bill had not yet generated a documented public or legislative debate at the time of the provided status.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s criminalization of conduct arising in parentage and custody disputes, and whether the proposed offense could be used in contentious family-law cases. The intent element—depriving property or blocking a biological parent’s rights—may raise questions about proof and enforcement. The exceptions for rape, incest, adoption, and spousal victims indicate an effort to narrow the bill’s reach, but those carveouts could also be focal points for debate about whether the statute is too broad, too narrow, or duplicative of existing remedies.