People in the Interest of AAT

We took jurisdiction of this case because of a constitutional question, which we now find is without merit and do not discuss. This is an appeal from a finding of paternity and from a subsequent order to pay child support entered in the same action. The trial court denied a request for back support. We affirm in part and reverse in part. Here we use the trial court’s designation of the parties, viz., the mother as petitioner and the alleged father as respondent.

This action was commenced under Articles 6 and 7 of the Children’s Code, Sections 19-6-101, et seq., and Sections 19-7-101, et seq.,…