neither a buccal swab nor a vial of blood is invasive. Now going in and removing a marrow sample is invasive … that needle punching into the bone fucking hurts. I do 3 to 4 vials every couple of weeks for a few months every couple of years.
According to this site
http://www.paternitytestinfo.net/
“Less frequently, but not uncommon are fathers who suspect they may not truly be the father and desire confirmation. There is a general consensus that at least 20 percent of fathers are supporting a child that is not actually theirs.” :eek:
What the hell kind of ad is this?
Good point. That means such a man can say “I’ve never cheated on my wife” and he wouldn’t be lying!
Believe it or not, it’s for a candy bar. The upshot is that if he’d had the candy bar to stuff in his mouth when she asked the question, he would have bought himself the necessary moment to think, and would have come up with the right answer instead of saying something stupid.
Twix? He uses the 2nd stick to double think his “oh I nailed you at such and such” and realize “oh, my daughter’s art teacher, the nun!”
Not a take a whole day off kind of thing assuming his work is anywhere near the courthouse of the jurisdiction handling the case, assuming the hearing starts on time, traffic isn’t bad, etc. Just because the actual hearing may only take 15 minutes doesn’t mean he’s only gotta take 15 mins out of his day.
By definition,a blood draw is invasive.
Really? Only one at a time? A friend of mine was one of three men ordered to submit DNA for testing over the fatherhood of one child. (It wasn’t him.)
Bolding mine
Just to nitpick, that 20% figure sounds totally wrong, and The Master agrees. Unca’ Cecil says 3.7% in Western nations and that sounds a lot more reasonable.
Yeah, he would. Not being his wife at the time doesn’t mean he wasn’t cheating on her. Cheating is about violating a sociocultural relationship, not a legal one.
Hmmm…just an idle musing.
My father is unknown (as in of the one night stand variety to a 16 year old in the 70s and there was a closed adoption)
Has there ever been any sort of DNA database established where I could submit my DNA and search for my father?
If you wanted to set up such a database what would be the legal challenges to make sure someone wasn’t on the hook for child support?
I would only now search out of curiosity - but I could well imagine that people WOULD NOT submit their DNA on the database side of there was even the smallest inkling they could end up supporting a child they didn’t know about. (there also would be many that would I know).
Is there any way that this can be overcome for truly unknown / unknowable fathers through any other method?
I could imagine maybe a double blind sort of method could be set up. As in - once the kid submits DNA, if there is a match the kid is not informed until after the father is contacted. Then once father is contacted he has the choice of following up - with all facts in hand (eg: yes you have to pay support / no you don’t etc). This would need to be legally protected - maybe kinda like journalists’ sources?
IME, there is one affidavit sworn per alleged father, but each affidavit will state there are others who could possibly be the biofather. The affidavits the county draws do not name the other alleged fathers, but the may use initials. Affidavits drawn by a personal attorney can say whatever they want (other than SSN).
The only way I can think of that this would work would be to provide that the child could not submit his DNA to the database until he was of an age where no claim for child support could be made.
Even then there would still be a conceivable risk. You could, for example, have sibling children who are known to have the same father. If the father of the older one is identified when the older one is at an age where a child support claim does not arise, the father could still find himself affected by a claim for child support for the younger one.
The bigger problem, though, is how you would persuade potential fathers to volunteer their DNA to the database. If they are minded to evade their obligations to any children they may have, there is no conceivable reason why they would co-operate.
Not quite.
He says that “minus paternity-dispute cases the overall [nonpaternity ] rate looks to be about 3.7 percent”. IOW 4% of children born are not the offspring of the claimant male.
From memory the average father is supporting 3 children (remember we are talking about children/father here, not children couple). So assuming that each father is cuckolded only once (not sure that is warranted, but work with me) that means that 3.7 * 3 = 11.1% of fathers are supporting children that are not theirs due to deception
Once we add in cases of adoption, children of second marriages, cases where the husband is aware of the mother’s infidelity and raises the child anyway and so forth it seems quite plausible that 20% of fathers are supporting a child that is not actually theirs.
The statistic is certainly misleading, but I would be surprised if it were not factually correct.
That sounds reasonable, but each father supporting an average of 3 kids seems high. 2 sounds closer, putting the overall rate at (maybe) 15% Your point that the rate is quite a bit higher than 3.7% stands, though.
(I admit I’m going with my gut on the 2 kids, though, so chances are pretty good I’m wrong. 
)
I would assume that the proportion of cuckolds is higher amongst those men that have reason to suspect that they are not the father of the child and therefor resort to genetic testing than amongst those that find no reason to distrust the mother of the child.
Well that’s kinda the point. In my personal case the father is unknown / unknowable. I could imagine that there would be some (myself incuded) that would be willing to forego the financial aspect to know more about their parentage. I can’t imgaine how it would ever work in practise though
I would agree with this. Most men can usually find *something *fairly distinctive that marks a child physically (or even behaviorally) as being biologically theirs. If here is the relative absence of any of these markers that’s usually when a guy is thinking about a paternity test.
If the same guy got named as the father of a child a series of times in a row by different women, at what point would you assume an attack on this guy? Would the state prosecute? whom?
I am just thinking that this is a phenomenal way to harass or discredit someone.
The only person who would notice this is probably the man himself (and those engaged in the conspiracy, if there is one). Each of the paternity hearings is a separate proceeding, and in a hearing to determine whether I am the father of A, the fact that I am the putative father of B, C and D is irrelevant.
Who would you prosecute? You would have no basis for prosecuting anyone simply on the evidence you suggest. The multiple claims could the the result of a bizarre conspiracy. On the other hand, maybe the guy gets around a lot. Which sounds like the more likely explanation to you?