intended that the best interest of children under these circumstances be disregarded or ignored, especially where paternity has been legally declared ten years prior. Under the majority view, the trial court is required, mechanically, to order a blood test and thus risk disturbing a legally established paternity judgment, irrespective of the impact the test may have on the child or the child’s family life. In my view, even with the technological advances and resulting increased certainty of identifying the biological parents through blood testing and DNA analysis, courts still must respect and consider the “best interest of the child” and make a determination independently based on the facts in the record before ordering blood tests. See Monroe, supra, 329 Md. at 769, 621 A.2d at 903 (<HOLDING>). See also, Turner, supra, 327 Md. at 117, 607
holding that the best interest of the child was the proper standard to apply in determining whether blood tests should be conducted holding the best interest of the child standard does not violate federal constitutional principles holding that when information which potentially undermines the best interest of the child as well as the interest sought to be protected by the legitimation statutes and the policy of this state it must first be tested in light of the best interest of the child standard holding that the best interest of the child standard should be used in deciding whether to grant a paternity petition holding that best interest of child need only be proven by a preponderance of the evidence