Excuse me, I think you're the father of one of my children.

Yup, my daughter looked like me. Red-faced, balding and spent a lot of time yelling.

There’s research to suggest that there’s a selective advantage for babies to look like their dads when born - i.e. dads are more likely to care for babies that look like them (as you have confidence the child is yours).

But there’s no doubt a lot of wishful thinking… many people comment that my daughter looks “just like her grandad” (when grandad is my wife’s[sup]1[/sup] step-father and hence not a blood-relation[sup]2[/sup] )

[sup]1[/sup] just to be clear (pace upthread) she had a step-father before she became my wife :wink:

[sup]2[/sup] Although he’s the best grandad she could ask for (obviously along with my pop!)

I agree with you, UDS. When I hear hooves, I think horses, not zebras. Unless I am the one who flew the zebras in.

Imagine the phone keeps ringing at your house asking for your husband about a different paternity case each time. Wouldn’t that be disruptive of your family life? (or asking for your wife with some dude claiming that your son is actually his, it works both ways).

It sounds like a great way for a disgruntled person to wreck the current relationship of an ex.

I gather that MissTake “works on the industry” and that they do try to be as minimally disruptive as possible. I am just still thinking that even that minimum disruption could be devastating in some cases. I cannot think of a better way to do it and I am not challenging the system in any form. I am just thinking that it is a tool that could be easily abused.

BTW, I had meant to ask before. Are any steps taken to protect the identity of Mary on this letter? Dad could either be the vengeful type and bring it on over poor Mary or he could have enough time to cover his ass knowing that it is Mary he needs to cover for.

Usually, the requirement that the alleged father be listed as such on the birth certificate puts a halt to things. We haven’t actually had many “behind Mom’s back” cases*, and of those, I can’t recall any turned out as a sad surprise for Dad.

*Frankly, Mom is usually willing to cooperate, so no need.

We have had calls from nosy mother-in-laws who want to make sure that their grandchildren were really sired by their son…

Why do you assume that it is “poor Mary” at the outset? Maybe it is “poor potential father” and she is the vengeful one? Why would you propose that Mary gets legal protection from the beginning?

In my OP I go for “poor daddy” because he is the one being singled out. In the case of the letter I go for "poor Mary’ because I am including either a vengeful dad or a cover-his-ass dad. In either case, sex is irrelevant. This is by no means a gender-equality issue, even if in practical terms the situation might present itself in one form more often than the other.

That’s almost exactly my situation, except I was born in the Summer of 69…oh yeah.

They changed it recently–it didn’t used to be a nun, it was “Miss Jones” or whoever. It was already a great commercial, but I guess making her a nun is even funnier. :confused: Except I don’t think a nun would wear that much makeup, if any.

Cite/link to older version? Because I’ve been seeing that commercial for quite a while, and it’s always been a nun when I’ve seen it.

One day I’m going to find the law for which “and besides she’s a whore” is a good argument for, and the legal system will tremble beneath me.

IANAL, but this seems totally wrong to me. If there’s any way out of being tested, it seems like getting a lawyer at the earliest possible time is the best move. If you wait until after there’s an official test on the books, you’re in a much weaker position.

Start with the case of Reynolds v. Serra.

I don’t see how any man could possibly respond to an approach that basically says “Some woman says that you are the father of her baby. What do you have to say to that?” At a minimum, he needs to be told who the woman is, when the child was born, and the circumstances in which it was alleged that the child was conceived.

In the eighties or nineties, the US Army took a cheek swab from me and I assume from every other soldier. Nothing ever came of it. I was never accused of anything. I just assumed they were making a database to identify KIAs.

If I would ever be accused of anything and have to submit DNA, could I get away with telling them “you already have it” ?

With the disclaimer that all my knowledge of these matters comes from TV drama, I would think that knowing it is Mary after you, and knowing when was it that you were with her, you could quickly make a couple phone calls and create an alibi. It is true, though, that a letter saying that “Mystery woman says you are a father of her children, please send DNA” is not a way to get someone to cooperate.

You might be able to create an alibi, but you’re pretty unlikely to be able to explain away a positive DNA test…

The US military has it. But the woman alleging that you’re the daddy doesn’t have it, and probably can’t get it from the US military.

Someone else does remember the other version…

<<I just saw this commercial on TV. They’ve changed it, apparently. Now he doesn’t say anything about “Sister…” He says something like, “Ms Jones. My daughter loves your art class!” I’m paraphrasing. I can’t remember the exact words.>>

but no, I can’t find that version.