Should mandatory DNA proof of paternity be required in all births?

Great Debates
21

I agree with this 100%

I liken it to unplanned pregnancies. AFAIC, it makes no difference if a child was a surprise or long-planned. Once the decision is made to continue a pregnancy, the child is a wanted one and it shouldn’t matter what circumstances it was conceived under.

Same as, once you decide that the child is yours and you will be its father, it’s your child, no matter the DNA. Test if you have doubts when its born, but if you freely choose to become a parent, it’s your child. Love and family are concepts that transcend DNA similarities, IMO.

If you’re the sort of person who would not wish to remain a parent, after years of loving and parenting a child, based solely on a DNA test, then you’re the sort of person who should pay for a test at birth, before investing that sort of effort.

22

Your body has nothing to do with it. And it’s HIS baby too … right?

I don’t think it should be mandatory. I agree with Green Bean that it should be available confidentially for a man who requests it.

23

How about the ones wrecked because the woman is (rightfully) furious that her husband would get the test done behind her back, as though it were fair to assume she was obviously up to no good, evidence thereof or no? I don’t for an instant think it’s ok to be running those kinds of tests without the woman ever finding out. Afraid she’ll be angry if it turns out she didn’t do anything wrong? Then don’t run around assuming she is. If you can’t put that level of trust in someone, the relationship is going to fall apart eventually anyway.

24

It absolutely has to do with my body, as I would have to submit to bloodwork. This isn’t a dad/baby test only–it involves blood draws on all three.

I don’t know of any scenario in which this could be done confidentially without the mother’s consent or knowledge. Confidentiality, frankly, is out the window on this one. You might keep it from the neighbors, but not from the mommma.

And yes, it is his baby, thank you. And I’m perfectly happy that he spent $500 proving something that he knew all along anyway. Whatever it takes, I guess.

25

This is what I love about this board – I opened this thread thinking “eh, this isn’t really a very interesting topic to me” (I opened it mostly because I usually enjoy threads by mangeorge) and by the end of it, I’m riveted.

Anyway, the first question I would have is about cost – this seems mighty costly, but it might also possibly lead to a reduction of costs to the taxpayer of paternity and child support lawsuits.

And no on the mandatory, if both parents decline testing, then so be it.

But I’m not sure I’m comfortable with the father being able to have a test done confidentially. I’m not a parent, so I feel a little funny about disagreeing with Green Bean and bodypoet on this one, but I think if I was a mother, I would not want ANY test done on my child without my knowledge. This might be my tin foil hat voice talking, but I wouldn’t want to open up the door for other kinds of tests or procedures being done without my knowledge.

That said, I think that a test should be done at the request of the mother, father, or both, and that both parents must be informed of the request for the test, and that neither parent can veto. It’s possible this might become more common, like a pre-nup agreement. I personally have never been interested in a pre-nup, but plenty of reasonable people who are just as committed to their marriage as I am think it’s a good “just in case” thing to do. If the test is a routine option, it could be done without either parent feeling mortally offended.

I think this concept is only workable if it’s used to insure child support down the road. For example, if both parents decline the test at the birth of the child (or reasonably thereafter), the father wouldn’t be able to change his mind years later and request testing when the child is 12 years old (well, I guess the family could test later if they wanted to, but it would have no legal bearing in terms of child support).

So my flowchart would be:

  1. Mother is entered on the birth certificate as the mother (I guess this would be obvious to everyone involved :slight_smile: )
  2. Parents are asked if they want the test, and either may request it
    …A. if both parents decline the test, his name goes on the birth certificate and he is now the father for THE REST OF TIME, and is responsible for providing for the child no matter what happens
    …B. if either or both parents want the test, the test is conducted
    …i. if the named father is in fact the father, go back to A.
    …ii. if the named father is NOT the father
    … a. then he can decline to support the child
    … b. he could OPT to be named on the birth certificate as the father and this would serve as a legal adoption, causing him to go back to A. and be responsible for the support of the child FOR THE REST OF TIME.
26

This is one of those things where people let reality get in the way of truth.

I feel pretty confident that I’m the biological father of my child.

I was there when she was born, I changed diapers, sat in terror of every cold. I love her enough to die for her. She loves me.

There’s no question that I am her father. Contibuting a sperm has nothing to do with it.

If I were to imagine for a moment that my wife betrayed me, that betrayal wouldn’t change that. I hate to say something so absolute, but anybody who thinks differently has no business being a father.

27

You’re not disagreeing with me, delphica. I absolutely object to ANY medical procedure (barring emergency care, of course) being done on my child without my knowledge and consent.

My point is that DNA testing is not plain old blood testing. For DNA tests, both parents and the child have to submit to bloodwork. Papa can’t sneak the baby off to the lab one day and have the test done without Mom’s knowledge.

If a man wants to request DNA testing for whatever reason, let him request it. My point is this: As a woman, and a faithful one at that, I would be sorely pissed, to the point of ending the relationship and sending that suspicious SOB packing. If I were also questioning my child’s paternity, then I might be more likely to consent, I don’t know.

You know, it’s interesting. This is an issue that gets way under my skin. The only thing I can liken it to is when all the rape threads were busy, and there were a few men who could only approach the subject from the angle that women might lie or file false claims. This is an entirely different subject, but similar in that it inspires that sort of instant defensive response among some folks, me included. That’s probably because my own personal experience with this has led me to characterize men who demand paternity testing as being suspicious, jealous, insecure louts who want to either get out of paying child support or make their ex-wives look bad. I’m sure this isn’t the case in all situations, of course–there are bound to be decent men out there who request DNA results for good reasons, just as there are certainly women who do as well. That said, it annoys me to no end when DNA tests are used as some sort of threat, or as a way of proving that someone was unfaithful.

In the end, I don’t see testing as being beneficial to anyone except the man who is proven to NOT be the father. And as a side effect of getting out of child support, he may also have to face never again seeing the child he helped raise and nurture. I guess it’s up to him to decide if the extra money is worth it, but it is certainly a calculated risk.

Whew. Does any of that make sense? I’m up too late, methinks.

28

Agree 100%, And I feel good about it. I wanna hug my kids. And grandkids. :slight_smile:

29

Would you agree with the following proposition:
“A man whose sperm impregnates a woman is not the father of any child that results from this impregnation.”

If no, then it seems as if sperm really does have something to do with it.

If yes, then would you agree that he should not be held financially responsible for that child, since he is not the father?
bodypoet, I was not aware that such a test would require blood from the mother as well. I’ll take your word for that. However, isn’t it very likely that the hospital would have, at least for a little while right after birth, a sample of her blood already?

30

Oops, BlackKnight accidently left something out. I’ll fix it,
“There’s no question that I am her father. Contibuting a sperm has nothing to do with it.”
There now, it makes sense.

31

As I said in the other thread if we are talking 1 in ten, even 1 in 20 that means there could easily be hundreds of thousands of men being forced to pay support on children they did not father. FTR I have children who I love dearly, and am in compliance with my support order, and I have no question that my twin sons are mine. I also have a daughter by another woman…at least I think I do. She told me I was the father but I later discovered via a mutual friend that I was not the only guy she was sleeping with. IF she had requested support I would have gone for testing. I believe part of the reason she does not ask for support is that it may not be mine.

Helped raise hell, many of the people I have known who ran into major support issues were not married to the mother. I would have a hard time swallowing that one of the dangers of casual sex is “paying for someone elses kid.” Cuckolding could easily account for a hefty percentage of birth control failure.

In the other thread it was mentioned that the “cuckolding” rate in lower income groups sometimes can run up to nearly 30%. When you are talking about taking 25% of the income from a man who only grosses $1000 a month that $250 a month is far more devastating than someone who makes $60K a year having do do without a new beemer. We are not just talking about taking care of a child, we are talking about shattering the life of someone who may not be responsible for what happened. How many people have to drop out of school and go to work to support children that may or may not be theirs.

IF DNA profiling was required on all children, in 20 years or so it would be possible to determine paternity with only the child since the parental DNA profiles would already be on file. Hell with enough computer power you might be able to find out who IS the father by checking baby against the men in the DB.

Mangeorge I am familiar with your POV on mandatory testing from drug testing threads and I do agree with you on that within some limits. It is not the governments business what I do to myself on my free time if it does not affect others. Having children by one man then blaming someone else is a whole different ball game. Other people are being hurt. and we have the technology to stop it.

32

The test would definitely not require the mother’s blood. It would be obviously known that the child is hers. Only the child and the father are needed for the test, so, yes, it could be done without the woman’s knowledge.

If a man is suspicious, then there is a problem. However, if the woman cheats, then there is just as much of a problem.

If one objects to medical tests being done on the child without the mother’s knowledge, then one must also object to such tests being performed without notifying the supposed father.

33

The large majority of men (including myself) have no question their children are biologically their own simply by looking at them and making a common sense observation of obvious physical similarities. In fact it has been observed many children (not all) tend to most resemble their biological fathers in the first years after birth. Some even hypothesize this is an adaptive mechanism to get fathers to bond with their children and contribute resources to them.

Within the complicated and stressful dynamic that exists in a tenuous or failing relationship, it is neither unreasonable, or otherwise irrational for a man to have an element of concern about the biological parentage of a child soon to be born and whether the child is in fact his. The incidence of unfaithfulness is (on average) much higher in these types of relationships.

If there is an assumed covenant of faithfulness within a relationship, and there is a reasonable suspicion that that covenant has been breached, it is well within the bounds of ethical behavior for a man to demand and receive genetic certification that the child being represented to be his is, in fact, his. In many cases doing this will tear asunder any remaining good faith between the man and woman, but that is a risk a man should be allowed to take if he determines it is necessary. Many women are outraged by this request, but it is a hard fact that as relationships get more stressful and dysfunctional the incidence of women finding solace in places other than their husband’s arms increases exponentially. Even if only 1 out 10, 20 or 30 or 50 the risk of being cuckolded in a failing relationship is high enough for a man being asked to undertake an enormous, lifelong commitment of supporting a child be informed about the terms of this engagement.

There is no question a man should have the absolute right to know if a child is his biologically, should he choose to ask the question (and suffer the relationship damage consequences for asking). The follow up question of what the personal moral and ethical duty of a man should be toward a child conceived within a marriage is the hub around which most of these considerations revolve. Many states answer this question for a person by automatically assigning irrevocable parental support duties if the child is born into a married relationship, regardless of who the bio-dad is and some do not. Blood ties will matter more to some people than others, and most mature men in stable relationships will want to assure and look after a child’s welfare to the extent they can.

If a man is in a relationship that is rapidly going off the tracks, and he has a high probability of being divorced or separated in the near future and will not have custody of the child, he should not (by default) be encumbered with the duty to financially support a child that his wife conceived outside the bounds of their marriage. That duty should first go to the man who impregnated the wife. Paternity testing should never be forced by default, but it should never be denied if the father requests it.

34

Of course not. You know how many daytime talk show episodes such a law would ruin?!

35

What about in instances where the husband has no reason to believe his wife may’ve cheated on him but she has and the child isn’t his? If he doesn’t suspect infidelity, he’s not going to think of asking for a paternity test… as others in this thread have said, alot (most?) men automatically assume that their wife’s child is also their own.

36

Blood testing is not necessary, nor is the presence of the mother.

DNA Paternity Testing FAQ

There are certain similarities between the two sets of threads, not least the tendency of some to blame the victim. In my view both rape and paternity fraud are serious and malicious acts, and it is entirely reasonable to take action to avoid becoming the victim of either. Rape can be difficult to prove in a court of law, but for paternity fraud we do at least have a reliable test.

It may well be the case that your ex requested a paternity test in order to hurt you. But if paternity was established as a matter of course soon after the birth, this kind of action wouldn’t be possible.

In general it isn’t about being suspicious or jealous, it’s about being safe. For some, it isn’t necessary for them to be biological parents, but I would argue that if that was the majority position there would be a lot more adoption going on.

I like delphica’s flowchart, but I still maintain that the tests should be confidential and that each partner should be allowed to get a test without the consent or knowledge of the other. In addition, the mother should be allowed to block the ‘adoption’ of the baby by a cuckolded husband if she wishes.

In this situation it would be his own fault for not making use of the system. He would have been presented with the option, and if he didn’t take it he’d only have himself to blame. It’s a bit like not getting fire insurance because you don’t suspect that your house will catch fire.

37

Cart, thanks for the link. New one on me–when I went through this whole ordeal (it’s been a while), the lab did blood draws on all three of us.

And I still absolutely object to the idea of ANYone subjecting my baby to testing without my consent. I do believe that a man has a right to have testing done if he requests it, but not without the consent and knowledge of the mother of the child in question.

Hmmm. I think I have more to say, but I want to consider it first.

38

Or do like I did…have twins that BOTH look just like me.

Many of the tests can be done from home for $300-$500. If it was mandated that genetic profiling be done on all children the process would be further refined and would become more cost effective. Either way, in the medical price tag of having a baby $500 is pocket change. Paying $500 a month for 18 years is not.

39

I agree with cart on this – because child support is about the welfare of the child. This is where you get into the whole “fatherhood is about more than just providing sperm” thing (I didn’t mean to make light of that, just trying to be brief). If the husband has nurtured and supported that child for say, five years, anything he later learns about his wife and infidelity is between him and the wife, not the child. By declining the test, the husband has assumed responsibility for the child, regardless of the source of the sperm.

If we can imagine some point in the future when such a test is very cheap and easy, I still think it’s possible it might become a routine procedure, opted for by many parents as a “just in case” measure. This might be one of those things one talks about before one gets married – “when we have kids, I want to 1. raise them methodist, 2. get that DNA scan, and 3. send them to public schools.”

40

So…within the envelope of a troubled relationship, if a man requests proof of paternity before taking on a lifetime responsibility of caring for a child that may or may not be his, the woman should have a unilateral right to refuse and withold her consent to have the child tested if she does not want the procedure performed?

1: In this context should the law be changed to allow the man the unilateral right to withold child support payments until paternity is genetically established? As it stands right now in many states the man is irrevocably and legally responsible by default for any child is delivered onto the doorstep of of the marriage regardless of it’s bio-parentage.

2: Is it fair or reasonable that a man now has a potential lifetime commitment to a child conceived with another man while his wife was cheating on him? What are the moral and ethical duties of a pregnant woman or new mother in this context? To herself? To her child? To her husband?

3: What are the rights of the child (an innocent) in this tangled triangle? Should the child’s right to support trump the man’s right to withhold support if he is not the bio-dad?