Can a Husband Deny He Is the Father of His Wife's Child?
Quick answer
Only in limited cases. A child conceived or born during a marriage is presumed to be the husband's legitimate child (Article 164 of the Family Code). The husband, or in a few cases his heirs, may challenge ("impugn") this only on the grounds listed in Article 166, and only within the deadlines in Article 170: one, two or three years depending on where he lives. If he does not act in time, the child's legitimate status becomes fixed. The mother's statement that her husband is not the father does not change the child's status.
What is the starting rule?
Children conceived or born during the marriage of the parents are legitimate.
This is a presumption. It applies even if the husband or the wife says otherwise, until the husband wins a case to impugn it.
On what grounds can a husband impugn legitimacy?
Article 166 gives the only grounds:
Legitimacy of a child may be impugned only on the following grounds: (1) That it was physically impossible for the husband to have sexual intercourse with his wife within the first 120 days of the 300 days which immediately preceded the birth of the child because of: (a) the physical incapacity of the husband to have sexual intercourse with his wife; (b) the fact that the husband and wife were living separately in such a way that sexual intercourse was not possible; or (c) serious illness of the husband, which absolutely prevented sexual intercourse;
The second ground is "That it is proved that for biological or other scientific reasons, the child could not have been that of the husband", except for a child conceived by artificial insemination that both spouses authorized in writing (Article 164, second paragraph). The third ground covers artificial insemination when the written consent was obtained through mistake, fraud, violence, intimidation or undue influence.
The bar is high. In *Concepcion v. Court of Appeals* (2005), on living apart, the Court said "it must be shown beyond reasonable doubt that there was no access that could have enabled the husband to father the child."
No ruling read for this page says whether a DNA result alone satisfies the "biological or other scientific reasons" ground, so this page does not say so.
Does the mother's statement matter?
No:
The child shall be considered legitimate although the mother may have declared against its legitimacy or may have been sentenced as an adulteress.
In *Concepcion*, the Supreme Court said "a minor cannot be deprived of his/her legitimate status on the bare declaration of the mother and/or even much less, the supposed father." It added: "The status and filiation of a child cannot be compromised."
Who may file the case?
Only the husband, and his heirs in exceptional cases. In *Liyao v. Tanhoti-Liyao* (2002), decided under the older Civil Code rules on the same point, the Supreme Court said: "Impugning the legitimacy of the child is a strictly personal right of the husband, or in exceptional cases, his heirs". The reason, the Court said, is that he is the one directly confronted with the scandal of the wife's infidelity. It added: "The child himself cannot choose his own filiation."
The heirs may act only in the three cases of Article 171: the husband died before his period to file expired, he died after filing without withdrawing the case, or the child was born after his death.
The legitimacy of a child also cannot be attacked in a case about something else. In *Concepcion*, the Court said legitimacy "could not be contested collaterally". A man whose own marriage to the mother was void, because she was still married to another man, "never acquired any right to impugn the legitimacy of her child".
What are the deadlines?
The action to impugn the legitimacy of the child shall be brought within one year from the knowledge of the birth or its recording in the civil register, if the husband or, in a proper case, any of his heirs, should reside in the city or municipality where the birth took place or was recorded.
If the husband or all his heirs live elsewhere, the period is two years if they live in the Philippines and three years if they live abroad. If the birth was hidden from the husband or unknown to him, the period runs from the time he discovered the birth or its registration, whichever is earlier.
After the period, the action is closed. In *Aguilar v. Siasat* (2015), the Court quoted an earlier ruling: after the periods in Articles 170 and 171, "the action to impugn the legitimacy of a child would no longer be legally feasible and the status conferred by the presumption becomes fixed and unassailable."
What if the parents were never married?
Then the child is not covered by the presumption of legitimacy. For a child born outside marriage, Article 176 says the father "has the right to institute an action before the regular courts to prove non-filiation during his lifetime." For how filiation of such a child is proved, see How to prove paternity.
How does this work in real life?
These are made-up examples to show how the rules work. They are not advice for any real case.
Zeny and Arman. Zeny gives birth while married to Arman. She tells relatives that another man is the father. The child is still legitimate (Article 167). Only Arman can impugn it, and only on an Article 166 ground.
Arman's deadline. Arman lives in the same city where the child was born and registered. He must file within one year from learning of the birth or its recording (Article 170). After that, the child's status is fixed.
Rico. Rico worked abroad for the whole year before his wife gave birth and never came home in that time. Living apart in a way that made intercourse impossible during the period in Article 166(1)(b) is a ground. Because he lives abroad, he has three years from learning of the birth (Article 170).
When do you need a lawyer?
Talk to a lawyer quickly if you are a husband who doubts that a child is yours, or a wife or child facing such a case. The deadlines are short and, once they pass, the child's status cannot be changed. A lawyer can check which ground applies and what evidence is needed.
If you cannot afford a lawyer, see Free legal help in the Philippines for the Public Attorney's Office (PAO) and other options.
Which provisions does this answer rest on?
Frequently asked questions
Is a child born during the marriage automatically the husband's child?
The law presumes so. Article 164 of the Family Code says children conceived or born during the marriage of the parents are legitimate. The presumption can be challenged only by the husband, or in some cases his heirs, on the grounds in Article 166.
On what grounds can a husband impugn the legitimacy of a child?
Article 166 lists three: it was physically impossible for him to have sexual intercourse with his wife in the first 120 days of the 300 days before the birth; biological or other scientific reasons show the child could not be his; or, for artificial insemination, the written consent was obtained through mistake, fraud, violence, intimidation or undue influence.
How long does a husband have to file?
Article 170 gives one year from knowledge of the birth or its recording if he lives where the birth took place or was recorded, two years if he lives elsewhere in the Philippines, and three years if abroad. If the birth was concealed, the period runs from discovery.
Can the mother declare that her husband is not the father?
Not with legal effect. Article 167 says the child is considered legitimate even if the mother declared against its legitimacy. In Concepcion v. Court of Appeals (2005), the Supreme Court said a child cannot lose legitimate status on the bare declaration of the mother.
Can the biological father or the child challenge the legitimacy?
No. The Supreme Court has called impugning legitimacy a strictly personal right of the husband or, in exceptional cases, his heirs. In Liyao v. Tanhoti-Liyao (2002), it said the child cannot choose to be the child of the mother's alleged lover.
What happens if the husband does not file in time?
The child's status becomes fixed. Quoting an earlier ruling, the Court said in Aguilar v. Siasat (2015) that after the Article 170 and 171 periods, the action is no longer legally feasible and the status becomes fixed and unassailable.
General information, not legal advice. For your case, ask a lawyer, the Public Attorney's Office (PAO) or the agency.
Was this page helpful?