i. Proof of Filiation

Requisites for Children by Artificial Insemination to be Considered Legitimate

• The artificial insemination must be made on the wife;
• The sperm of the husband, a donor, or both may be used;
• The artificial insemination has been authorized or ratified by both spouses on a written instrument executed and signed by them before the birth of the child; and
• The written instrument is recorded in civil registry together with the birth certificate of the child (Art. 164, par. 2)

Proof of Filiation – Family Code, arts. 172, 173 and 175

Art. 172. The filiation of legitimate children is established by any of the following:

(1) The record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final judgment; or

(2) An admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a private handwritten instrument and signed by the parent concerned.

In the absence of the foregoing evidence, the legitimate filiation shall be proved by:

(1) The open and continuous possession of the status of a legitimate child; or

(2) Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws. (265a, 266a, 267a)

Art. 173. The action to claim legitimacy may be brought by the child during his or her lifetime and shall be transmitted to the heirs should the child die during minority or in a state of insanity. In these cases, the heirs shall have a period of five years within which to institute the action.

Art. 175. Illegitimate children may establish their illegitimate filiation in the same way and on the same evidence as legitimate children.

The action must be brought within the same period specified in Article 173, except when the action is based on the second paragraph of Article 172, in which case the action may be brought during the lifetime of the alleged parent. (289a)

General Rule: Filiation of legitimate or illegitimate children is established by any of the following (Art. 172, par. 1):

a. The record of birth appearing in the civil register or a final judgment

A certificate of live birth purportedly identifying the putative father is not competent evidence of paternity when there is no showing that the putative father had a hand in the preparation of said certificate. The local civil registrar has no authority to record the paternity of an illegitimate child on the information of a third person. (Cabatania v. CA, G.R. No. 124814, 2004) It is well settled that a record of birth is merely a prima facie evidence of the facts contained therein. It is not conclusive evidence of the truthfulness of the statements made by the interested parties. (Benitez-Badua v. CA, G.R. No. 105625, 1994)

b. An admission of legitimate or illegitimate filiation in a public document or a private handwritten instrument and signed by the parent concerned.

Exception: In the absence of these pieces of evidence, the legitimate filiation may be proved by (Art. 172, par. 2):

• Open and continuous possession of the status of a legitimate (or illegitimate) child “Continuous” does not mean that the possession of status shall continue forever but only that it shall not be of an intermittent character while it continues. The possession of such status means that the father has treated the child as his own, directly and not through others, spontaneously and without concealment though without publicity. (Mendoza v. CA, G.R. No. 86302, 1991) There must be evidence of the manifestation of the permanent intention of the supposed father to consider the child as his, by continuous and clear manifestations of parental affection and care, which cannot be attributed to pure charity. Such acts must be of such a nature that they reveal not only the conviction of paternity, but also the apparent desire to have and treat the child as such in all relations in society and in life, not accidentally, but continuously. (Jison v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 124853, June 21, 1999)
• Any other means allowed by the Rules of Court and special laws
• The due recognition of an illegitimate child in a record of birth, a will, a statement before a court of record, or in any authentic writing is, in itself, a consummated act of acknowledgement of the child, and no further court action is required. In fact, any authentic writing is treated not just a ground for compulsory recognition; it is in itself a voluntary recognition that does not require a separate action for judicial approval. (Eceta v. Eceta, G.R. No. 157037, 2004)

The father in his SSS Form E-1 satisfies the requirement for proof of filiation and relationship of petitioner to the Aguilar spouses under Article 172 of the Family Code. Filiation may be proved by an admission of legitimate filiation in a public document or a private handwritten instrument and signed by the parent concerned, and such due recognition in any authentic writing is, in itself, a consummated act of acknowledgment of the child, and no further court action is required. (Aguilar v. Siasat, G.R. 200169, 2015)

A thumb mark has been repeatedly considered a valid mode of signature. Thus, the document executed by the putative father evidencing his voluntary recognition of filiation is valid. (San Agustin v. Sales, G.R. No. 189289, 2016)