Mississippi Code
Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (2026)
Blood tests and other tests; enforcement of order to submit; notice of witnesses testifying as to sexual intercourse with mother
✓ current as of July 2026
- (1)
- (a) In all cases brought pursuant to Title IV-D of the Social Security Act, upon written declarations of the mother, putative father, or the Department of Human Services made under penalty of perjury to the best of his or her knowledge, information and belief alleging paternity, the department may issue an administrative order for paternity testing which requires the mother, putative father and minor child to submit themselves for paternity testing. The department shall send the putative father a copy of the Administrative Order and a Notice for Genetic Testing which shall include the date, time and place for collection of the putative father's genetic sample. The department shall also send the putative father a Notice and Complaint to Establish Paternity which shall specify the date and time certain of the court hearing by certified mail, restricted delivery, return receipt requested. Notice shall be deemed complete as of the date of delivery as evidenced by the return receipt. The required notice may also be delivered by personal service upon the putative father in accordance with Rule 4 of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure insofar as service of an administrative order or notice is concerned.
- (b) If the putative father does not submit to genetic testing, the court shall, without further notice, on the date and time previously set through the notice for hearing, review the documentation of the refusal to submit to genetic testing and make a determination as to whether the complaint to establish paternity should be granted. The refusal to submit to such testing shall create a rebuttable presumption of an admission to paternity by the putative father.
- (c) In any case in which the Department of Human Services orders genetic testing, the department is required to advance costs of such tests subject to recoupment from the alleged father if paternity is established. If either party challenges the original test results, the department shall order additional testing at the expense of the challenging party.
- (2) In any case in which paternity has not been established, the court, on its own motion or on motion of the plaintiff or the defendant, shall order the mother, the alleged father and the child or children to submit to genetic tests and any other tests which reasonably prove or disprove the probability of paternity. If paternity has been previously established, the court shall only order genetic testing pursuant to Section 93-9-10.
If any party refuses to submit to such tests, the court may resolve the question of paternity against such party or enforce its order for genetic testing as the rights of others and the interest of justice require.
- (3) Any party calling a witness or witnesses for the purpose of testifying that they had sexual intercourse with the mother at any possible time of conception of the child whose paternity is in question shall provide all other parties with the name and address of the witness at least twenty (20) days before the trial. If a witness is produced at the hearing for the purpose provided in this subsection but the party calling the witness failed to provide the twenty-day notice, the court may adjourn the proceeding for the purpose of taking a genetic test of the witness before hearing the testimony of the witness if the court finds that the party calling the witness acted in good faith.
- (4) The court shall ensure that all parties are aware of their right to request genetic tests under this section.
- (5)
- (a) Genetic tests shall be performed by a laboratory selected from the approved list as prepared and maintained by the Department of Human Services.
- (b) The Department of Human Services shall publicly issue a request for proposals, and such requests for proposals when issued shall contain terms and conditions relating to price, technology and such other matters as are determined by the department to be appropriate for inclusion or required by law. After responses to the request for proposals have been duly received, the department shall select the lowest and best bid(s) on the basis of price, technology and other relevant factors and from such proposals, but not limited to the terms thereof, negotiate and enter into contract(s) with one or more of the laboratories submitting proposals. The department shall prepare a list of all laboratories with which it has contracted on these terms. The list and any updates thereto shall be distributed to all chancery clerks. To be eligible to appear on the list, a laboratory must meet the following requirements:
- (i) The laboratory is qualified to do business within the State of Mississippi;
- (ii) The laboratory can provide test results in less than fourteen (14) days; and
- (iii) The laboratory must have participated in the competitive procurement process.
Codes, 1942, § 383-08; Laws, 1962, ch. 312, § 8; Laws, 1987, ch. 455, § 1; Laws, 1990, ch. 543, § 3; Laws, 1997, ch. 588, § 133; Laws, 1999, ch. 512, § 2; Laws, 2011, ch. 530, § 5, eff. 7/1/2011.
Amended by Laws, 2020, ch. 466, SB 2877,§ 3, eff. 7/1/2020.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2021 · leading case: Ivy v. Harrington, 644 So. 2d 1218 (Miss. 1994).
Ivy v. Harrington, 644 So. 2d 1218 (Miss. 1994). “That issue is controlled by Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (1972), as Amended.”
Baker by Williams v. Williams, 503 So. 2d 249 (Miss. 1987). “The authority for such order is Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (1972): The court, upon motion of the defendant, shall order the mother, the child, and alleged father to submit to blood tests.”
Hogan v. Buckingham Ex Rel. Buckingham, 730 So. 2d 15 (Miss. 1998). “Hogan's position is that the present suit is controlled by Miss.Code Ann. § 93-9-21(1). That subsection provides in part: The court, on its own motion or on motion of the plaintiff or the defendant, shall order the mother, the alleged father and the child or children to submit…”
McIntosh v. Dep't of Human Servs., 886 So. 2d 721 (Miss. 2004). “" Yet while the statute plainly provides a mechanism for recoupment of costs when additional testing is needed, it does not detail the procedure to challenge the validity of genetic testing.”
Deer v. State Dept. of Pub. Welfare, 518 So. 2d 649 (Miss. 1988). “Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (Supp. 1987). One effect of the amendment is that the ordering of the blood tests is now discretionary, rather than mandatory.”
Dauwanna Mitchell v. Tabitha Moore, 237 So. 3d 681 (Miss. 2017). “Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (1)(b) (Rev. 2011).”
Johnson v. Ladner, 563 So. 2d 1368 (Miss. 1990). “The chancery court ordered blood tests pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (1972). This Court granted an interlocutory appeal and vacated the blood tests ordered.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. Jones, 627 So. 2d 810 (Miss. 1993). “ANALYSIS Pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (Supp. 1992), a chancellor may on his or her own motion in response to a motion of a party order the mother, child, and putative father to submit to a blood test.”
Dep't of Human Servs. v. Smith, 627 So. 2d 352 (Miss. 1993). “Pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (Supp.1992), a chancellor may — on his or her own motion or in response to a motion of a party — order the mother, child, and putative father to submit to a blood test.”
Chisolm v. Eakes, 573 So. 2d 764 (Miss. 1990). “Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (Supp. 1988). Miss.”
Rafferty v. Perkins, 757 So. 2d 992 (Miss. 2000). “On August 7, 1996, the chancellor, upon motion of Rafferty for blood tests pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 93-9-21 (1994), ordered Justin, Rafferty, Easter and Perkins to submit to blood tests.”
Matter of Est. of Chambers, 711 So. 2d 878 (Miss. 1998). “If a witness is produced at the hearing for the purpose stated in this subsection but the party calling the witness failed to provide the twenty-day notice, the court may adjourn the proceeding for the purpose of taking a blood or other test of the witness prior to hearing the…”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21(1) — 2 cases
Hogan v. Buckingham Ex Rel. Buckingham, 730 So. 2d 15 (Miss. 1998). “Hogan's position is that the present suit is controlled by Miss.Code Ann. § 93-9-21(1). That subsection provides in part: The court, on its own motion or on motion of the plaintiff or the defendant, shall order the mother, the alleged father and the child or children to submit…”
Jordan v. Baggett, 791 So. 2d 308 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 93-9-21(1)(c) — 1 case
McIntosh v. Dep't of Human Servs., 886 So. 2d 721 (Miss. 2004). “" Yet while the statute plainly provides a mechanism for recoupment of costs when additional testing is needed, it does not detail the procedure to challenge the validity of genetic testing.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.