Sorry, bodypoet, are you saying that you feel both parents must be notified of any medical procedure performed on a child, or just the mother?
I’m a little surprised that, given the way you were treated by your first husband, you seem to have so little empathy for those in the same boat. You advocate the use of emotional blackmail to force men into accepting responsibility for children that they didn’t father. This viewpoint, which I’m sure that many people share, is the very reason why either partner should be allowed the test without the knowledge of the other.
The very fact we have laws, courts and police shows that both men and women in society need to be regulated to keep them honest. It’s simply a fact that we have paternity fraudsters and we have deadbeat dads. We need laws to tackle both.
I agree with most of what drachillix says, we are talking about something every bit as malicious as wife beating, and DNA testing would appear to be the best way to combat it. If you have a better suggestion rather than relying on blind trust - which manifestly doesn’t work - I would be very interested to hear it.
No, it isn’t a valid comparison, the two things are entirely different: a cheek swab versus unnecessary surgery. I do have some sympathy with an “anti big brother” sentiment, but I really can’t see any nefarious application for DNA sampling, or even a DNA database. It’s all good as far as I can tell.
Is this what’s known as an ad hominem attack? The answer is, no more than a woman should feel wimpy for wanting laws to protect her from an abusive partner. I don’t suppose that you’d tell her to get over it.
I think that DNA paternity tests at birth could be a good idea. If they are just done along with all of the other tests and done for everyone. Then it isn’t an issue of the husband accusing the wife of anything, it becomes more of an issue of “hospital policy”. To prevent mistakes just have the test redone with new samples, just incase the original samples were mislabeled or mixed up. If the husband is proved to be the father than it can only strengthen an already good marriage. If the husband isn’t the father he will know it and a cheating spouse will be exposed. A cheating husband could also be exposed like this. If the hospital was allowed to keep DNA samples to compare in the event of an uncertain paternity a match could be made from their files. It has the potential to be both a good thing and a Pandora’s box. It all depends on how it is used.
Boy do you have some neat fantasies about medicine. Yes you can refuse tests that medical personell need to do to properly care for you, they can also tell you to have your baby in the parking lot if you don’t like their way.
Optional but a damn good idea. Luckily the crafty Autz knows better than most parents and the majority of licened medical personell and stops this horrific procedure from happening. Personally I am fascinated that you are trying to lecture me on freedom and choice with regards to medicine and your children when you think Baby formula should only be available by prescription
I am looking at this as bigger than just paternity testing. Possibilities for genetic research abound, Bulletproof identification later in life or in the event of death. Actually FINDING deadbeat dads.
Maybe for a comparison you should try refusing to apply for a Social security number.
Or better yet since we’re so up on refusing DNA samples, lets just have dad refuse to be tested when paternity is questioned, after all he has the right to refuse doesn’t he Autz. He has not been convicted of a crime, how can he be forced to.
I’m not comparing getting beaten up regularly with raising a child. I’m comparing the act of beating someone up with the act of tricking them into accepting responsibility for a child that isn’t theirs - in certain circumstances.
Now if we are only talking about support payments, then I would only put paternity fraud on a par with any other fraud or theft.
But within the context of a marriage or a stable relationship, I think it can be far worse. What the unfaithful wife is doing is deliberately robbing her husband of fatherhood - because she is obviously aware that her husband may not be the baby’s father. If he knew he wasn’t the father he may well leave her and have the family he wanted with another woman.
Now men like mangeorge have indicated in this thread that it isn’t important for them to be the biological father of their children. Good for them, but I don’t think that this is the majority view. I don’t think it’s too controversial to say that parenthood is exceptionally important to many people, that’s why I consider that this issue is so serious.
It’s not quite that easy. My ‘medical fantasies’ are actually law. If I were in labor and mentioned to the OB that I didn’t want drops in my babies eyes, they certainly could not “tell me to have my baby in the parking lot.”
“…a claim for abandonment where injury results from a physician’s refusal to treat a patient needing further care without giving the patient reasonable time to find substitute care. Patient abandonment can also be alleged as a breach of the duty of care in a medical malpractice case.”
“…you cannot discharge a patient when he or she is in need of treatment for well-being; you must first stabilize that patient’s condition before terminating the relationship. Once the patient is in a stable condition, you must provide a reasonable amount of time for that patient to find a new physician. You should advise the patient in writing that you are discharging him or her as a patient, the basis for discharging him or her, and that you will continue to treat that patient for 30 days so he or she can locate a new physician.”
I’d be happy to share the reasons for not wanting drops in my newborn’s eyes, but it’s a bit off topic. That was merely an example.
People refuse medical advice all the time (lose weight, stop smoking) and also medical treatment (I want to try an herbal drug insted of chemo, I don’t want my child to have that vaccination).
ad hominem much?
"There is no law that requires parents to get a social security number for their new born children. The Social Security Administration was recently asked this very question. In their response the Assistant Commissioner of Social Security stated:
Allow me to clarify, if you tell them when you are in labor, already admitted, that you refuse a test or procedure, yes they are stuck. If you tell your doctor 2 months ahead of time that you will refuse the test and procedures you will be looking for a new doctor unless you already have a doctor willing to work around whatever “religious freedom” issues you might have. Second guessing the OB during delivery is going to royally piss
And they generally surrender their chances for a successful lawsuit in the process. The nurses caring for you will chart your refusal for what they feel is a needed test or procedure. They also can withold treatment if doing so would be dangerous without the tests/procedures you refuse.
No not really, I felt it was a highly relevant reversal of position on your part.
Interesting stuff, OK you can refuse, if you want to jack up your kids future financial life and your ability to claim them as tax deductions. Bad example on my part.
and I am proposing that such a thing becomes law. I am proposing a change in the laws that you are using to defend your position. Why? Because unfaithful wives and deadbeat dads are hiding behind them. You are not submitting to random drug testing, or admitting to a crime, I am proposing linking a born name to a genetic profile. SSN could be part of that and I would highly reccomend it.
Argh thats what I get for walking away and coming back…
Second guessing the OB during delivery is probably going to royally piss them off. Not wise. The line between doing no harm and not going the extra mile are pretty broad.
Why did I just know this was going to come up. Allow me to restate more clearly
Beating your SO requires a complete disregard for their feelings and love for you.
So does fucking the gardener and trying to force your now estranged SO to foot the bill.
I do think that filing a fraudulent child support claim should be considered a jailable criminal act if it is not already.
Or maybe you believe emotional abuse is no biggie since it dosen’t leave visible bruises. Parenthood is a wonderful thing, it is also stressful and emotionally painful at times. One persons word should not be sufficent to force parenthood on an unwilling person who is not responsible for the preganancy.
But it wouldn’t be just a change in the law. It would fundamentally change freedoms in America.
You seem to think we could just easily add it to an already existant list of required medical procedures. But my point is that there is no such list.
There are no standard required medical procedures.
Right now you can’t perform a medical proceedure on someone without their concent, unless you have a court order.
In order to get a court order you have to show just cause.
What you are advocating is forcing a medical procedure on the general population without their consent.
This is probably unconstitutional.
At any rate, what other medical procedures will be forced on people? Now you’ve establish is OK legally to force people to submit to this medical intrusion without just cause, or any cause for that matter.
In our history we have forced people to be sterilized and take drugs against their will. Most people now realize that was wrong and barbaric.
We’re supposed to be more civilized now, aren’t we?
I did not state that the other tests were mandatory, generally speaking you and your baby are going to be asked to have a variety of tests done. If they draw a sample for DNA typing at the same time whoopie, If you want your medical care a la carte fine.
Not entirely true but I’ll let you figure out the exceptions.
I personally would love to see it be common and voluntary. Like those evil social security numbers that everyone has anyway. OR link it to the assistance. You want to be able to qualify for state assistance, child support, etc, your kid gets profiled. No profile, no case. Last time I checked there is no consitutional right to collect food stamps or child support.
Uh I am not advocating sterilizing anyone, or tattooing your religion on your forehead or changing anything about a person. Its little more than a picture, that will be immensely vauable to science, and to enforcing child paternity, and identifying dead bodies, etc.
I have happily provided a variety of good reasons for doing such a thing. I am advocating change for the betterment of parental rights for millions of people.
If you have a better idea we are all waiting.
Or do we just stand aside and go, well not my problem, today.
You really believe that for the first time in history the United States should forcibly require a medical procedure on all Americans against their will?
I’m not an anti-government type. My kids have ss# (I never called them evil, just optional), they go to public schools and have all their shots.
But my trust of the government is not infinite.
I worry about the precedent set by requiring this procedure. I worry about the government having access to this huge amount of personal information. I worry about losing freedom for ‘the betterment of society.’
I said, up there;
“Besides, don’t you men feel a little wimpy for asking for this? It’s like taking the easy way out.”
Women, of course, can and do act just as wimpish as men. But this thread is focused on the right of men to have access to dna info to determine (prove) paternity of a child assumed to be theirs.
I’m simply asking, isn’t “wimpy” for some men to want the dna profile to be mandatory (for all births) so that they don’t have to face the considerable discomfort of seeking this information themselves.
DNA profiling does have the potential for great personal harm. Even without this possible harm, it is yet another encroachment into our privacy, and shouldn’t be taken lightly.
Even with DNA testing, the man has no proof that his wife has been faithful. He just has proof that the child is his.
If he is fertile and having sex with her, then he is taking the risk of her getting pregnant. While biologically speaking, he may not be the father of her child, it seems that he still is in the picture as a sexual partner and potential father.
I really don’t understand the feelings people get about biological parentage, so understand that I’m speaking from ignorance. But if a woman has sex with her husband and then goes out and has sex with the gardener, either man could be the father. Her “crime” is in having sex with another man, not in having the other man’s child. The child is the same child no matter whose DNA turns out to have been involved.
Gosh. I’m pretty sure I didn’t make myself clear. Sorry. I can’t find the words for what I mean!
In short: Both parents, if they share custody, should be notified.
It’s a bit confusing, because we haven’t really specified if we are discussing children within an intact marriage, children born outside of marriage to non-life partners, or whatever other combinations are out there.
To clarify my position: No one has the right to perform medical procedures on the child in question without the knowledge of the custodial parent. That is assuming, of course, that only one parent has primary custody.
In shared custody situations, I believe it is at the very least unethical for one parent to clandestinely take Baby for paternity testing. I am talking about EITHER parent here, but that point is moot, because I believe it is impossible to test for paternity without the father’s knowledge, as you would need a DNA sample from him. (Correct? That’s my understanding.)
**
Hmmm. I’m not quite sure where you’re coming from here. I have empathy for women who are subjected to such tests at the whim of vindictive ex-husbands. I also have empathy for men who end up paying support on children who aren’t their biokids, if in fact they would choose to NOT support those children if they knew the truth.
I certainly don’t expect men to support children they didn’t father, and I’m not sure where the concept of emotional blackmail comes in. I do believe men have a right to reqest testing; I believe women have a right to be free of testing as long as it is not an issue with the father in question.
I’m not entirely convinced that relying on “blind trust” is unreasonable. Can we truly not trust men to have good and reasonable judgement about the women they are involved with? Do we have any reliable stats on how many children are being supported by non-biodads without their knowledge? I know a lot of mothers quite well, and I can’t think of anyone, offhand, who has a child by another man without the current husband’s knowledge. DNA testing is readily available already, and any parent can request it–and probably obtain it with little trouble–at any time. Are men really so scared about making a spouse or ex-spouse angry that they will support a child for it’s entire lifetime?
I guess what it comes down to is this: Are men and women so unreliable in their relationships, and so poor in judgement, and so basically inept in interpersonal skills, that we have to mandate proof of paternity?
Of course these are not really answerable, but those are some of the questions that occur to me when I try to get my mind around the whole issue.
Since IIRC a piece of hair can be the sample I have problems with the term “procedure” which to people like me who speak medical implies surgical procedure. A bit of hair, or cheek swab is hardly a “procedure” in that respect.
As a staunch defender of gun ownership I understand the “nibbling away at our rights” you speak of all too well. What I am proposing is actually far less detail than a credit company has on you.
The DNA DB contents, IMHO. SS# and string of data representing the results of your DNA profile. Maybe your sex would be useful too.
I was actually under the assumption that the DNA DB would be a private company (like a credit company) supported by fees for access to blocks of samples and fees for crossreferencing DNA profiles for law enforcement (who’s hair is this at the crime scene) and finding “unknown dads.” The reply could be simply to tag a profile generated by an existing medical lab with an SSN of a match (or notation of no match) and hand it back. The DB would not try to keep track of where we are, where we work, how much money we owe people, and how often we make our payments, not even our name. How much personal information is that really.
** Bodypoet** If the DB were to exist…2-3 generations down the road you would not need dad…his data would already be on file. Once baby was tested DNA DB Inc could run a comparison between baby results and SS# of apparent father. The hospital would never even see his sample, further reducing any “security exposure” issues.
And for a support case, thats all we need to know.
Let me flip this scenario around a bit, your husband is a gardener and gets tagged for child support by another woman with a newborn baby (and you have been married for a couple years).
Your reaction would be…
But if its not MY child I should have every right to tell my cheating scum wife/gf to get the hell out of my life without paying support.
[/QUOTE]
Such self-righteous attitudes are exactly the reason I would never give birth in a hospital if it could possibly be avoided. Let me get this straight… you’re saying that if I, as a birthing mother, express a desire for certain actions, or refuse other treatments, based on studied, informed decisions, the doctor would not “go the extra mile” to avoid complications or worse? That is truly disgusting.
I’m a strong proponent of women being knowledgeable about the birthing process, common allopathic treatments and procedures done to newborns, and making informed decisions about what you do and don’t feel is necessary for you and your infant. If the doctor doesn’t like it, tough. It’s my body and my baby, and I get the final say in what happens to us both. Period. Letting someone bully you into eye drops, every vaccine in the book, circumcision, formula, whatever, in my opinion is both scary and stupid. It’s not a “religious freedom issue” either, I just think some things, like vaccines for common, mild childhood ailments such as pertussis or chicken pox are unnecessary, as is circumcision. I’m not compromising my decisions for the convenience of a self righteous OB, and the implication that I wouldn’t be given the same efforts for care as someone who passively goes along with every ridiculous thing they want to subject newborns and birthing mothers to is disgusting. I truly hope you are not a medical professional or, at least, as mangeorge put it, I hope you didn’t mean it the way I took it.
