I am a divorced man of 50 with two young adult children. I had no
intention at this age of having other children but my girl friend has
become pregnant by me. We have decided to have the child but I need to
know what this means in terms of child support, if we do not marry,
and other responsibilities. If I do marry her, what are the legal
implications for my older sons, my estate? I am not living with my
girl friend but - since I used no means to prevent the birth (and
accepted her word that she had) -recognize my paternity and am trying
to prepare for it as well as I can. I had recently separated from my
girl friend when she told me she wanted a child but reunited with her
when she told me she had changed her mind so, knowing how she felt, it
was impossible for me to even suggest an abortion. My grown sons are
trying to be supportive but are not happy with the situation as both
are starting families themselves. I would like to do everything I can
to protect the baby, while reducing as little as possible my ability
to help my older children. I don't know if this is a permanent
relationship but don't feel as though I've been trapped either. I need
a concrete legal basis to help me make decisions.

---

Request for Question Clarification by expertlaw-ga on 24 May 2004 12:23 PDT

It has been a few weeks since you posted. Do you still desire that
this question be answered?

---

Clarification of Question by wilbur-ga on 25 May 2004 01:58 PDT

I would still like the question to be answered. Right now I am doing
everything I can to favor a good relationship with the mother although
I feel we aren't ready to decide on marriage. We are going to a
therapist to help us figure things out. I am totally committed to my
future child, financially and emotionally...

---

Request for Question Clarification by tutuzdad-ga on 25 May 2004 20:40 PDT

Hi Wilbur:

I'd like you to take a look and my comment and provide me with some
feedback about whether it adequately answers your question.

Regards;
tutuzdad-ga

---

Clarification of Question by wilbur-ga on 30 May 2004 07:53 PDT

I feel that this is an excellent response to my question and ask that
it be considered an answer. I thank tutuzda for his kind and humane
approach as well. I am fully committed to my future child and am
trying to understand gradually what kind of a commmittment I will be
able to make to her or his mother. It does help somehow to get a
concrete idea of my situation though. Thank you, wilbur-ga £

Dear wilbur-ga;

Since you are agreeable to my research as an answer, I am reposting it
at your request in order to officially close your question. I do hope
the best for you in this situation and I welcome you back if you have
any other question in the future, concering this or any other topic:


I am approaching your question without prejudice and take the position
that you want to know how the law affects you as an unmarried parent
of a minor child. Along those same lines I will point out what some of
the Colorado and other laws and opinions are, what they say and how
they might, under certain circumstances, a have an impact on you
financially, and how they might affect your responsibilities, your
estate, your child?s mother and your older children. This is not meant
to be considered legal advice (se disclaimer at the bottom of this
page) or take the place of licensed legal counsel. Having said that,
again I?d like to hear from you as to whether or not this serves as a
beneficial and satisfactory answer. Here we go:

Since you are resolved that you are indeed the biological father of
this unborn child and have no objection to this assumption, I too will
assume, for the purposes of this question, that this is the case.
Having said that I will focus on the matter of law as it pertains to
biological fathers in Colorado where paternity is not in dispute.

In Colorado (as in most states) the non-custodial parent does indeed
have a legal obligation to support his or her biological offspring.
Unwed parents are considered much the same as divorced parents and
their financial obligations to their children are identical in that
regard as well. Standardized "child support guidelines" establish a
monthly basic child support obligation and then a percentage to the
non-custodial parent's monthly gross income is added accordingly to
arrive at the amount of the total monthly obligation. Colorado law
defines one's "Gross Income" in this manner:

""Gross income" includes income from any source and includes, but is
not limited to, income from salaries; wages, including tips declared
by the individual for purposes of reporting to the federal internal
revenue service or tips imputed to bring the employee's gross earnings
to the minimum wage for the number of hours worked, whichever is
greater; commissions; payments received as an independent contractor
for labor or services; bonuses; dividends; severance pay; pensions and
retirement benefits, including but not limited to those paid pursuant
to article 64 of title 22, C.R.S., articles 51, 54, 54.5, 54.6, and
54.7 of title 24, C.R.S., and article 30 of title 31, C.R.S.;
royalties; rents;  interest; trust income; annuities; capital gains;
any moneys drawn by a self-employed individual for personal use;
social security benefits, including social security benefits actually
received by a parent as a result of the disability of that parent or
as the result of the death of the minor child's stepparent, but not
including social security benefits received by a minor child or on
behalf of a minor child as a result of the death or disability of a
stepparent of the child; workers' compensation benefits; unemployment
insurance benefits; disability insurance benefits; funds held in or
payable from any health, accident, disability, or casualty insurance
to the extent that such insurance replaces wages or provides income in
lieu of wages; monetary gifts; monetary prizes, excluding lottery
winnings not required by the rules of the Colorado lottery commission
to be paid only at the lottery office; taxable distributions from
general partnerships, limited partnerships, closely held corporations,
or limited liability companies; and alimony or maintenance received.
"Gross income" does not include child support payments received."

LEXIS NEXIS
http://198.187.128.12/colorado/lpext.dll/Infobase/2331f/23c7d/23c7f/24109?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates


If you scroll down to Paragraph B subsection 10 you will see the
actual standardized pay schedule:

FAMILY LAW ADVISOR
14-10-115. Child support - guidelines - schedule of basic child
support obligations.
http://www.divorcenet.com/co/1410115.html


Again, the tax status of a biological but non-custodial parent in
Colorado is the same as that of a divorced non-custodial parent. Child
support payments are not tax deductible and as a non-custodial parent
you cannot claim the child dependency exemptions unless the custodial
parent signs these rights over to you on IRS form 8332.

NOLO - LAW FOR ALL
http://www.nolo.com/lawstore/form/detail.cfm/ObjectID/2F5A57C5-8275-4A90-9FEEA7BA7AE60C1B

TAXES
http://www.codivorce.com/taxes.htm

In the state of Colorado all biological children are equal heirs to a
parent's estate. In other words, the fact that you are not married to
your child's mother is of little issue in this regard.

C.R.S. § 15-11-103
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:yi_ipMWW1fsJ:www.leg.state.co.us/2001/inetcbill.nsf/billcontainers/1422286090348C7D872569BC005D9434/%24FILE/159.01+C.R.S.+%C2%A7+15-11-102&hl=en

With this same statute in mind, Colorado now observes a "committed
partner" relationship, which means that for all intents and purposes,
a cohabitating spouse (person to whom you are not married but
otherwise similarly committed to) with whom you have a committed
relationship CAN, in some instances, very well become a beneficiary of
your estate also provided that both partners file the notarized
affidavit of committed partnership with the clerk and recorder in the
county in which at least one of the partners is domiciled. This serves
to legitimize a relationship (and children) without the benefits or
burden (depending on how you view it) of marriage but with it comes
certain rights and obligations. The final disposition, equitable
distribution, and right to claim to your estate by your committed
partner happens to be one of them depending on your situation:

(See C.R.S. § 15-11-102 and Article 13 C.R.S. § 13-23-101 on this same link)
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:yi_ipMWW1fsJ:www.leg.state.co.us/2001/inetcbill.nsf/billcontainers/1422286090348C7D872569BC005D9434/%24FILE/159.01+C.R.S.+%C2%A7+15-11-102&hl=en

Now Colorado is an equitable distribution state; meaning that a court
may divide a person's estate between the parties who have a legitimate
claim in an equitable fashion. Equitable, however, does not always
mean equal. It would seem though that if you are living with this
woman and raising the child your relationship, in spite of the fact
that you are not married, would be viewed by the court as a familial
one and that the child (AND POSSIBLY your partner) are both entitled
to a certain portion of your estate should you die. On the other hand,
if you are not living together as a family unit, the rights of your
child's mother would be dramatically lessened while the rights of
claim to your estate by the child would remain unaffected. In other
words, anyone can dispute a will and "claim" that they are entitled to
a portion (or a greater portion) but the court will take into
consideration the existing relationship, the implied relationship and
the biological relationship when determining equitable distribution.
If you were living together as a family unit then it may be easier for
the court to conclude that you intended for these people to be also
considered as such for "all" purposes including equitable distribution
of your estate.

Of course, in a situation where you are not living with the child's
mother, the child (your biological offspring and legal heir) continues
to have the right to claim a portion of your estate by virtue of your
paternity. This has been established many times, most notably in these
US Supreme Court challenges and decisions:

U.S. Supreme Court 
REED v. CAMPBELL, 476 U.S. 852 (1986) 
476 U.S. 852
REED v. CAMPBELL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF
RICKER 
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, EIGHTH SUPREME JUDICIAL
DISTRICT 
No. 85-755. 
Argued April 30, 1986 
Decided June 11, 1986
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=476&invol=852

U.S. Supreme Court 
TRIMBLE v. GORDON, 430 U.S. 762 (1977)
430 U.S. 762
TRIMBLE ET AL. v. GORDON ET AL. 
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS 
No. 75-5952. 
Argued December 7, 1976 
Decided April 26, 1977 
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-in/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=430&invol=762



I am not, by any means, trying to pass on my brand of morality, but
since I presented a number of financially bleak issues related to your
situation it is only fair in the interest of this new child that I
provide you with some support for your decision to "step up to the
plate". It may be true that there are some relatively minor financial
perks for your "older" children if you severed this relationship with
the child and the child's mother, but the fact remains that you now
have another heir to your estate and someone else who will be
dependent upon YOU as a MAN and a FATHER to support their needs. This
situation, for better or worse, is one that you entered into (whether
it was intentional or unintentional ? it doesn't matter now). In my
opinion (and from what I gather, your position also) this new child is
morally entitled to the same and equal benefits of your prosperity
without prejudice and being an innocent product of your actions and
unable to care for itself in a manner in which you would provide, it
seems crystal clear what you obligations now are. What your decision
should be based on now it appears is your level of integrity and
willingness to admit and accept responsibility for your actions. While
you understandably want to please everyone involved and you can
certainly place a value on your older children's opinions, your final
decision should be an independent one based on what is best for ALL
your biological children and not just a few. Beautiful things can come
from a father-child relationship that blooms later in life. Take my
word for it...I know ? I have four children ages 20, 18, 16 and, yes,
5. So you see, it happened to me too, and I couldn't be happier. For
me, mature fatherhood turned back the clock. It gives a man a new
opportunity to be young again. Who knows, this invigorating, youthful
experience may even lead you to new energy and new prosperity,
effectively making you even more capable of caring for your new child
AND your "older" children's needs in a manner that is not only
acceptable to everyone but more blessed. You seem to be on the right
track with your enthusiasm to seek mutual counseling and do what is
necessary to perverse (or even enhance) your relationships. I commend
you for this.

I hope you have enough now to make an informed decision and enough
insight now to see that it's really not all about finances and
benefits. As a mature man I think you will agree with me that the
trick to living life to the fullest is to simply limit your regrets.
That?s really the bottom line, isn?t it?

Because of the complicated and person nature of your situation, I?m
posting this as a comment for you to consider. If it meets your
requirements as an answer, I do hope you let me know so I can post it
as an answer. I hope you find that my research exceeds your
expectations.

Best regards;
Tutuzdad-ga - Google Answers Researcher



INFORMATION SOURCES

Defined above

SEARCH STRATEGY


SEARCH ENGINE USED:

Google ://www.google.com


SEARCH TERMS USED:

COLORADO

LAW

CHILD SUPPORT

OBLIGATIONS

GUIDELINES

STATUTES

EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION

PROBATE

HEIRS

ESTATE

BIOLOGICAL

COMMITTED PARTNER

CHILD DEPENDENCY EXEMPTIONS

CUSTODIAL PARENT

NON-CUSTODIAL PARENT

ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN

GROSS INCOME

I am not a lawyer. However, your estate can be dispersed however you
like if you have a living trust or will. Definately put one into play,
NOW. If you already have a will/living trust, you will want to ammend
it for the new child. This is true whether or not you marry.

If you are the new baby's father, it won't matter whether or not you
marry your girlfriend--you will still be responsible for at least
partially supporting the child.


Hope this helps some,
Kriswrite

Dear wilbur-ga;

I posted an answer to your question some time back and it was removed.
However, I am now posting it with some minor revisions as a comment
for you to consider. I?d like your input as to whether or not it
satisfactorily addresses your question and if you would benefit from
it as an answer. I am approaching your question without prejudice and
take the position that you want to know how the law affects you as an
unmarried parent of a minor child. Along those same lines I will point
out what some of the Colorado and other laws and opinions are, what
they say and how they might, under certain circumstances, a have an
impact on you financially, and how they might affect your
responsibilities, your estate, your child?s mother and your older
children. This is not meant to be considered legal advice (se
disclaimer at the bottom of this page) or take the place of licensed
legal counsel. Having said that, again I?d like to hear from you as to
whether or not this serves as a beneficial and satisfactory answer.
I've studied your problem for quite some time now and there is a lot
to discuss, so let's get right to it:

Since you are resolved that you are indeed the biological father of
this unborn child and have no objection to this assumption, I too will
assume, for the purposes of this question, that this is the case.
Having said that I will focus on the matter of law as it pertains to
biological fathers (wed or otherwise) in Colorado where paternity is
not in dispute.

In Colorado (as in most states) the non-custodial parent does indeed
have a legal obligation to support his or her biological offspring.
Unwed parents are considered much the same as divorced parents and
their financial obligations to their children are identical in that
regard as well. Standardized "child support guidelines" establish a
monthly basic child support obligation and then a percentage to the
non-custodial parent's monthly gross income is added accordingly to
arrive at the amount of the total monthly obligation. Colorado law
defines one's "Gross Income" in this manner:

""Gross income" includes income from any source and includes, but is
not limited to, income from salaries; wages, including tips declared
by the individual for purposes of reporting to the federal internal
revenue service or tips imputed to bring the employee's gross earnings
to the minimum wage for the number of hours worked, whichever is
greater; commissions; payments received as an independent contractor
for labor or services; bonuses; dividends; severance pay; pensions and
retirement benefits, including but not limited to those paid pursuant
to article 64 of title 22, C.R.S., articles 51, 54, 54.5, 54.6, and
54.7 of title 24, C.R.S., and article 30 of title 31, C.R.S.;
royalties; rents;  interest; trust income; annuities; capital gains;
any moneys drawn by a self-employed individual for personal use;
social security benefits, including social security benefits actually
received by a parent as a result of the disability of that parent or
as the result of the death of the minor child's stepparent, but not
including social security benefits received by a minor child or on
behalf of a minor child as a result of the death or disability of a
stepparent of the child; workers' compensation benefits; unemployment
insurance benefits; disability insurance benefits; funds held in or
payable from any health, accident, disability, or casualty insurance
to the extent that such insurance replaces wages or provides income in
lieu of wages; monetary gifts; monetary prizes, excluding lottery
winnings not required by the rules of the Colorado lottery commission
to be paid only at the lottery office; taxable distributions from
general partnerships, limited partnerships, closely held corporations,
or limited liability companies; and alimony or maintenance received.
"Gross income" does not include child support payments received."

LEXIS NEXIS
http://198.187.128.12/colorado/lpext.dll/Infobase/2331f/23c7d/23c7f/24109?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templates


If you scroll down to Paragraph B subsection 10 you will see the
actual standardized pay schedule:

FAMILY LAW ADVISOR
14-10-115. Child support - guidelines - schedule of basic child
support obligations.
http://www.divorcenet.com/co/1410115.html


Again, the tax status of a biological but non-custodial parent in
Colorado is the same as that of a divorced non-custodial parent. Child
support payments are not tax deductible and as a non-custodial parent
you cannot claim the child dependency exemptions unless the custodial
parent signs these rights over to you on IRS form 8332.

NOLO - LAW FOR ALL
http://www.nolo.com/lawstore/form/detail.cfm/ObjectID/2F5A57C5-8275-4A90-9FEEA7BA7AE60C1B

TAXES
http://www.codivorce.com/taxes.htm

In the state of Colorado all biological children are equal heirs to a
parent's estate. In other words, the fact that you are not married to
your child's mother is of little issue in this regard.

C.R.S. § 15-11-103
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:yi_ipMWW1fsJ:www.leg.state.co.us/2001/inetcbill.nsf/billcontainers/1422286090348C7D872569BC005D9434/%24FILE/159.01+C.R.S.+%C2%A7+15-11-102&hl=en

With this same statute in mind, Colorado now observes a "committed
partner" relationship, which means that for all intents and purposes,
a cohabitating spouse (person to whom you are not married but
otherwise similarly committed to) with whom you have a committed
relationship CAN, in some instances, very well become a beneficiary of
your estate also provided that both partners file the notarized
affidavit of committed partnership with the clerk and recorder in the
county in which at least one of the partners is domiciled. This serves
to legitimize a relationship (and children) without the benefits or
burden (depending on how you view it) of marriage but with it comes
certain rights and obligations. The final disposition, equitable
distribution, and right to claim to your estate by your committed
partner happens to be one of them depending on your situation:

(See C.R.S. § 15-11-102 and Article 13 C.R.S. § 13-23-101 on this same link)
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:yi_ipMWW1fsJ:www.leg.state.co.us/2001/inetcbill.nsf/billcontainers/1422286090348C7D872569BC005D9434/%24FILE/159.01+C.R.S.+%C2%A7+15-11-102&hl=en

Now Colorado is an equitable distribution state; meaning that a court
may divide a person's estate between the parties who have a legitimate
claim in an equitable fashion. Equitable, however, does not always
mean equal. It would seem though that if you are living with this
woman and raising the child your relationship, in spite of the fact
that you are not married, would be viewed by the court as a familial
one and that the child (AND POSSIBLY your partner) are both entitled
to a certain portion of your estate should you die. On the other hand,
if you are not living together as a family unit, the rights of your
child's mother would be dramatically lessened while the rights of
claim to your estate by the child would remain unaffected. In other
words, anyone can dispute a will and "claim" that they are entitled to
a portion (or a greater portion) but the court will take into
consideration the existing relationship, the implied relationship and
the biological relationship when determining equitable distribution.
If you were living together as a family unit then it may be easier for
the court to conclude that you intended for these people to be also
considered as such for "all" purposes including equitable distribution
of your estate.

Of course, in a situation where you are not living with the child's
mother, the child (your biological offspring and legal heir) continues
to have the right to claim a portion of your estate by virtue of your
paternity. This has been established many times, most notably in these
US Supreme Court challenges and decisions:

U.S. Supreme Court 
REED v. CAMPBELL, 476 U.S. 852 (1986) 
476 U.S. 852
REED v. CAMPBELL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF
RICKER 
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, EIGHTH SUPREME JUDICIAL
DISTRICT 
No. 85-755. 
Argued April 30, 1986 
Decided June 11, 1986
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=476&invol=852

U.S. Supreme Court 
TRIMBLE v. GORDON, 430 U.S. 762 (1977)
430 U.S. 762
TRIMBLE ET AL. v. GORDON ET AL. 
APPEAL FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF ILLINOIS 
No. 75-5952. 
Argued December 7, 1976 
Decided April 26, 1977 
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-in/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=430&invol=762



I am not, by any means, trying to pass on my brand of morality, but
since I presented a number of financially bleak issues related to your
situation it is only fair in the interest of this new child that I
provide you with some support for your decision to "step up to the
plate". It may be true that there are some relatively minor financial
perks for your "older" children if you severed this relationship with
the child and the child's mother, but the fact remains that you now
have another heir to your estate and someone else who will be
dependent upon YOU as a MAN and a FATHER to support their needs. This
situation, for better or worse, is one that you entered into (whether
it was intentional or unintentional ? it doesn't matter now). In my
opinion (and from what I gather, your position also) this new child is
morally entitled to the same and equal benefits of your prosperity
without prejudice and being an innocent product of your actions and
unable to care for itself in a manner in which you would provide, it
seems crystal clear what you obligations now are. What your decision
should be based on now it appears is your level of integrity and
willingness to admit and accept responsibility for your actions. While
you understandably want to please everyone involved and you can
certainly place a value on your older children's opinions, your final
decision should be an independent one based on what is best for ALL
your biological children and not just a few. Beautiful things can come
from a father-child relationship that blooms later in life. Take my
word for it...I know ? I have four children ages 20, 18, 16 and, yes,
5. So you see, it happened to me too, and I couldn't be happier. For
me, mature fatherhood turned back the clock. It gives a man a new
opportunity to be young again. Who knows, this invigorating, youthful
experience may even lead you to new energy and new prosperity,
effectively making you even more capable of caring for your new child
AND your "older" children's needs in a manner that is not only
acceptable to everyone but more blessed. You seem to be on the right
track with your enthusiasm to seek mutual counseling and do what is
necessary to perverse (or even enhance) your relationships. I commend
you for this.

I hope you have enough now to make an informed decision and enough
insight now to see that it's really not all about finances and
benefits. As a mature man I think you will agree with me that the
trick to living life to the fullest is to simply limit your regrets.
That?s really the bottom line, isn?t it?

Because of the complicated and person nature of your situation, I?m
posting this as a comment for you to consider. If it meets your
requirements as an answer, I do hope you let me know so I can post it
as an answer. I hope you find that my research exceeds your
expectations. I wish you the best of luck and I look forward to
hearing from you soon if this will work for you as an answer.

Best regards;
Tutuzdad-ga - Google Answers Researcher



INFORMATION SOURCES

Defined above

SEARCH STRATEGY


SEARCH ENGINE USED:

Google ://www.google.com


SEARCH TERMS USED:

COLORADO

LAW

CHILD SUPPORT

OBLIGATIONS

GUIDELINES

STATUTES

EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION

PROBATE

HEIRS

ESTATE

BIOLOGICAL

COMMITTED PARTNER

CHILD DEPENDENCY EXEMPTIONS

CUSTODIAL PARENT

NON-CUSTODIAL PARENT

ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN

GROSS INCOME

Dear wilbur,

It is not unusual for somebody who is starting a second family, for
whatever reason, to have questions about estate planning issues. Often
there are concerns, not only for the person but also for members of
his family, about inheritance. There may be family heirlooms that a
parent wishes to ensure will pass to a particular child. Also, it may
be necessary to provide differently for a child who will reach
adulthood in the parent's senior years, as opposed to children who
have already reached adulthood and have achieved some level of
financial security.

Your adult children may well feel aggrieved by the fact that you are
having another child just as they are starting their own families, but
as they say "there's no crying over spilt milk". You can't turn back
the clock, and they will adjust.

The options for your new family unit are those you originally noted -
remaining single (albeit perhaps while cohabitating) or marrying.
Under Colorado law, you may opt for "common law marriage", as detailed
on the Colorado Attorney General, Department of Law website:
http://www.ago.state.co.us/FAQPAGE/commlaw.stm

You do NOT have the option of registering a "committed partnership" at
this time, as the bill linked in the answer above (Senate Bill 01-159)
did not pass. Additionally, that bill would not have applied to your
circumstances even had it passed, as you would only have qualified for
a committed partnership if you were otherwise barred by law from
marrying. (See proposed statute 13-23-102(2)(c): " The two persons
would not be permitted to marry each other under the laws of this
state"). This may change, as another bill has been introduced to
permit civil partnerships, although it is not expected to pass. See
The Coloradoan Online:
http://www.coloradoan.com/news/coloradoanpublishing/Legislature2004/010904_civilunions.html

Although this does not seem to be often done, it is possible to remain
single and agree to a mutually acceptable parenting time schedule and
child support payment. If you choose that path, it can be helpful to
reduce your agreement to writing (even if that simply means mutually
charting out your parenting time schedule on two identical calendars),
and you should also keep records of any support payments you make
"just in case". (When voluntary arrangements go bad, a history of
undocumented cash payments, or of checks made out to a child instead
of to the other parent, can result in your being ordered to again pay
support that you had already paid.) A mutually agreeable voluntary
support agreement will generally offer more flexibility than
court-ordered support, allowing you (if you choose) to find agreeable
means of support beyond fixed dollar figures. Please note that
parenting time arrangements determined by mutual agreement are almost
always more successful (greater parental satisfaction, lower conflict)
than those ordered by a court.

If you marry or enter into a domestic partnership, you should consider
a prenuptial agreement. The purpose of a prenuptial agreement is to
outline how each spouse's separate property will be treated in the
event of divorce. A prenuptial agreement will help ensure your
financial security (e.g., by permitting you to protect your retirement
accounts or pension, or your premarital estate) in the event that the
marriage doesn't work out. This may seem unromantic, but at fifty you
need to take a hard look at what a divorce would do to your ability to
support yourself in the event that you retire, or suffer an unexpected
illness or disability. You should not view a prenuptial agreement as
something that "lasts forever" - you may even wish to include a clause
which expires the agreement after a certain number of years of
marriage. That is, the uncertainty of your relationship is likely to
pass after five, ten, or fifteen years of marriage, and you may wish
to have the agreement expire if the marriage lasts that long.

You may also wish to consider the option of setting up a living trust,
and transferring some of your assets into that trust prior to
marriage. That way, you can provide for your children (both the adult
children and the one you are expecting) in the manner of your choosing
from your present estate, while avoiding some of the issues associated
with the merger of estates through marriage or if you predecease your
new wife.

The suggestion that, pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute 15-11-102,
all biological children are equal heirs may is misleading, as it
relates to the law of intestate succession - what happens if you don't
have an estate plan. Colorado law plainly states, "A decedent by will
may expressly exclude or limit the right of an individual or class to
succeed to property of the decedent passing by intestate succession."
(CRS 15-11-101(2). See also CRS 15-11-302(2), which expressly permits
the disinheritance of a child). The laws governing intestate
succession do not mean that you cannot (if you choose) leave different
inheritances to your different children, or even disinherit a child.
Also, the link is to a Senate Bill which did not pass (which otherwise
would have made "committed partners" eligible as heirs under the law
of intestate succession.)

The key is whether you have created a valid estate plan. If you choose
not to marry, and you don't update a prior will, upon petition the law
will typically protect a child born after-the-fact, assuming that the
omission of the child from the will is accidental by redistributing
the estate to provide for an equitable inheritance. See CRS 15-11-302.

The notion of Colorado as an "equitable division" state is normally
invoked in the context of the division of a marital estate upon
divorce. While that would include a divorce from a common law
marriage, there does not appear to be any authority under which
Colorado would apply its divorce law to nonmarried relationships - or
which would even give a nonmarried cohabitant the right to petition
for a share of an estate. (Please note in this context that a common
law spouse is just that - a spouse - *not* a nonmarried cohabitant.)
Also, the manner in which a divorce court would divide an estate is
entirely separate from the manner in which a probate court would do
so, in the event that it had to resolve an intestate estate or that a
will were challenged. While Colorado statute expressly protects a
spouse or child who are not acknowledged in a will, and limits your
ability to disinherit a spouse, there are no similar legal protections
for unmarried cohabitants. (See CRS 15-11-301, Entitlement of spouse;
premarital will; and 15-11-302, Omitted children).

Given your situation, you should render this discussion of intestate
succession unnecessary by preparing an adequate estate plan. Whether
or not you decide to marry, you should consider seeking out a highly
qualified estate planning attorney in your vicinity, and having a
meeting to discuss your estate planning options. I recommend using a
law firm as opposed to an accounting firm as, although I'm sure this
is not universally true, my experience has been that law firms
typically provide a more customized estate planning package and
usually do so at a lower cost. A professionally prepared estate plan,
customized to your circumstances, can provide you with the assurance
that your estate will be protected, and will pass to your heirs in the
manner of your choosing. An estate planning lawyer may be able to
assist you with a prenuptial agreement, should you choose to use one,
or at least should be able to refer you to a partner or another lawyer
who can prepare one for you.

- expertlaw

Wilbur,
I have knowingly raised children which are not my biological children
(blended family), obtain a blood test before you proceed any further. 
I know that this speaks to trust in the relationship, however she is
not your wife, ergo requesting a paternity test, I do not believe, is
a request which is unreasonable.

My position on DNA tests boils down to, either have a DNA test
performed before you accede to paternity, or assert your paternity and
don't have one done - ever. I read a statistic not so long ago that a
large clinical study revealed 20% nonpaternity for married fathers.
This information was not revealed to the parents, and most of the
fathers will never know that their children are not biologically
"theirs". That's usually for the best, for all parties involved. DNA
testing is widely available, and is now ordinarily performed with a
cheek swab as opposed to a blood sample.

Based upon your expressions of morality and responsiblity, I don't
think that you are the sort of person who would try to abandon a child
on the basis of a DNA test. However, some people react differently
than they expect when they learn of their nonpaternity (and some
fathers are eager for DNA tests, even where they have only mild
suspicions of nonpaternity, in the hope of avoiding child support). If
you choose to accept the possibility of nonpaternity by declining DNA
testing now, you are accepting your role as the child's father. And
that really should be the end of the story.