A dependency proceeding in this case was initiated when the 13 year old minor’s mother was arrested. The man the minor referred to as “daddy” was Kevin W., who was living with the mother at the time of the minor’s birth, took her into his home, signed a paternity declaration, and cared for her. The trial court found that Kevin W. was the presumed father and ordered placement of the minor with him. Another presumed father, Mario A., argued that the trial court should have ordered genetic testing before weighing the competing presumptions of paternity. This claim was waived because it was not raised in the trial court. Even assuming it could be raised, the trial court did not err by failing to order genetic testing. Biological paternity by a competing presumptive father does not necessarily defeat a non-biological father’s presumption of paternity. In the case of a child over two, the familial relationship is considerably more palpable than the biological relationship. Even if genetic testing had shown Mario A. to be the biological father, the result of the court’s weighing process would have been the same. Since the result of testing would have been irrelevant to the outcome, it was not reversible error that the court refused to order it.