TRENTON — At the least, it could mean fewer former husbands and wives dragging each other to the likes of "The Maury Povich Show" to tell their sad and often seamy stories.

A state lawmaker proposed a measure last week that would require all newborns — and their parents — to undergo genetic testing to create a record should questions arise about whom the father or mother is.

For now, the bill’s future in the Legislature is uncertain.

Under the measure (A2609) unveiled by Assemblyman Gilbert Wilson, doctors or midwives — or whoever delivers the baby — would be responsible for conducting the tests at the expense of patients or their insurers.

While Wilson said the measure applies to mothers and fathers alike, "mostly this should be geared towards the father because with the mother, of course, there is no doubt."

The problem is not limited to guests on angst-ridden television talk shows, said Wilson, a Democrat from Camden County who goes by the nickname Whip.

"I’ve heard different stories about fathers who are raising children and paying support for a child and come to find out years later that it wasn’t their child," he said. "It’s a devastating thing to find out."

Wilson said the bill would allow men who turn out not be a child’s father to seek reimbursement for support or other expenses they have incurred raising the child.

Prospects for the bill, which has not been posted for debate, are murky at best. "There are no immediate plans to post it but it will be reviewed just like any other bill," said Tom Hester Jr., the spokesman for Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-Essex), who decides what bills are voted on.

So far, no companion legislation has been introduced in the state Senate.

Deborah Jacobs, executive director of the New Jersey branch of the ACLU, said she did not want to comment on a measure that had little chance of passage.

Nevertheless, the proposal found support among fathers’ rights advocates, and one family law attorney called it a "good attempt" at clarifying state law.

"I think this is great," said Bruce Eden, civil rights director for the New Jersey chapter of Dads Against Discrimination. "Judges have too much discretion in the family court issues. We need to codify a lot of this stuff and make guidelines."

Tom Snyder, a family law attorney, has such a case before the state Supreme Court that relates directly to the bill.

His client, identified in court documents as R.W., is seeking reimbursement from a former brother-in-law after he discovered through a home DNA test that the 23-year-old he raised is not his biological son.

According to the documents, R.W. thinks his former brother-in-law is the biological father and is trying to compel him to take a DNA test to prove it so he can recoup what he spent to raise him.

Snyder, who would not comment on the specifics of his own case, said there is already case law allowing men who unwittingly raise someone else’s child to seek redress, but it’s "not clearly defined under a single statue."

"The proposed amendment is very significant because, if enacted, in a correct form, it will provide judges, lawyers and the public at large with a clear and definitive road map," Snyder said.

Wilson, for his part, said the bill was just a rough draft and that if it were considered, he would be open to amending it.

"The big picture is what it can save, what it can prevent as far as destroying families because the truth was not known," he said. "You have to take a look at the human side of this also, the emotional side — the damage these things can cause if they’re not dealt with immediately."

Dr. Donald Chervenak, president-elect of the New Jersey Obstetrical and Gynecological Society, said his "initial thought is the bill is something of interest, but right now there are many pressing issues."

A similar measure was introduced last year in the Kansas Legislature that would require all babies, along with their fathers and mothers, to undergo genetic testing to establish paternity, but it has not progressed.