Enforce was perhaps too strong a word, Spring, but it's not uncommon for the Family and Appellate Courts to give directions to establish paternity through DNA testing.
Unless exceptional circumstances apply, it is generally accepted within the family justice system that it is in the best interests of the child for their true identity to be made known to them at the earliest opportunity.
Providing any such application is not made in isolation, anyone with ?sufficient personal interest? can apply for a declaration of parentage [FLA 1986 s55A] as part of other/existing proceedings. Under FLRA 1969 S20, the Court may then issue a direction that DNA tests to determine parentage are carried out.
I refer you to a judgement much quoted by Families Need Fathers, namely, that of Mr Justice Bodey: Family Division: Re T (Paternity: Ordering Blood Tests) 2001: ?I am entirely satisfied that in evaluating and balancing the various rights of the adult parties and of T under Article 8, the weightiest emerges clearly as being that of T, namely that he should have the possibility of knowing, perhaps with certainty, his true roots and identity.?
From tzella's earlier posts, and purely on the basis of him having overstayed his allotted time in the UK, I've formed the impression that she and her ex do not share the same the same racial and cultural origin.
Given your own recent experience of the justice system, I invite you to imagine what a couple of immigration and human rights briefs could do with this scenario. Suffice it to say the cost to the taxpayer could be considerable.
For those who advise tzella to move home in order to ensure that he does not discover the pg, I would remind them that sooner or later any child of this union will wish to know the circumstances of their birth and may form a pressing desire to go in search of the father who, as Donkey has said, arguably has the right to know.
It's a well-known truism that there's no such thing as a free lunch and, sooner or later, the bill requires settlement.