Should paternity testing be mandatory? 1 in 25 fathers not biological parent

utyh2ikcq9z76b

Depending on the statistics you read, rates of
One in 25 fathers is not biological parent

Their review of estimates of so-called paternal discrepancy over more than 50 years suggests the father was not the natural parent in between 1% and 30% of cases.

If these rates are to believed and DNA testing so cheap now(around €100) should mandatory measures be introduced? or should men create a culture that makes paternity testing a social norm

Samuel T. Cogley

Ignorance is bliss in many cases.

Fiery mutant

My kids are now 6 and 9, and if I was to find out I am not their father, it would devastate me, absolutely.

But I am the only father they know, and I could never lose the love I have for them, nor could I abandon them when they have no knowledge or fault in the situation.

I am their dad, and will be there for them until I die.

VainHard Bendix

There should be maternity testing as well. #Equality

JMNolan

It should be a criminal offence to deceive a man into believing a child who isn't his is his.

kneemos

JMNolan wrote: »

It should be a criminal offence to deceive a man into believing a child who isn't his is his.

Bite their heads off,like a Tomcat.

Samuel T. Cogley

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Ignorance is bliss in many cases.

sweeping things under the carpet
with figures of 4% maybe it should be a matter of fact compulsory part of registering the parents

RabbleRouser2k

Fiery mutant wrote: »

My kids are now 6 and 9, and if I was to find out I am not their father, it would devastate me, absolutely.

But I am the only father they know, and I could never lose the love I have for them, nor could I abandon them when they have no knowledge or fault in the situation.

I am their dad, and will be there for them until I die.

Sounds like you have doubts...

I personally think that yes, it should be mandatory. Someone I know recently had a kid with a woman who he knew for barely a few weeks. She had broken up with a boyfriend not too long before they met and slept together at a get together. (I don't know if it was a wedding, a birthday party or work thing-hence my vagueness).

The close proximity of her dumping her ex, and then getting pregnant, makes me think the kid isn't his.

Graces7

Other aspects aside, it would be a real safety net regarding inherited disease etc. Prevent deaths

Sile Na Gig

Mandatory paternity testing sounds a bit oppressive. Most people know who the father of their child is. I don’t know how you would come up with the 1/25 stat. Surely you don’t know what you don’t know.

I was at a party with my OH when I was pregnant with my third child and someone conversationally asked my husband how he knew that the child was his. I was completely blindsided.

It feels like there’s a certain cohort of posters that have issues with trusting women.

VinLieger

JMNolan wrote: »

It should be a criminal offence to deceive a man into believing a child who isn't his is his.

Grand so and what would you suggest the punishment should be? Really looking forward to hearing any option that doesn't in some way needlessly hurt the child involved

pwurple

Ah fun times. False positives, false negatives, administrative errors. The cost involved. 
Giving some trainee in a lab ultimate power over your happiness.

JMNolan

VinLieger wrote: »

Grand so and what would you suggest the punishment should be? Really looking forward to hearing any option that doesn't in some way needlessly hurt the child involved

What do we normally do with mothers who break the law?

VinLieger

JMNolan wrote: »

What do we normally do with mothers who break the law?

I think I asked you the question first......

_Brian

It’s available th anyone who goes out looking if they feel the need.

Is that not enough?

Your Face

Just go on Jeremy Kyle.

JMNolan

VinLieger wrote: »

I think I asked you the question first......

I thought I did answer the question. I'll explain it a bit better.

Mothers are already subject to legal penalties if they break the law. If deliberately deceiving a man into believing a child is his was made illegal then legal penalties should be applied. What you want to hear is "Ohhh we should lock her up!!!!" so you can reply with "wont someone think of the children".

_Brian

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Sounds like you have doubts...

I personally think that yes, it should be mandatory. Someone I know recently had a kid with a woman who he knew for barely a few weeks. She had broken up with a boyfriend not too long before they met and slept together at a get together. (I don't know if it was a wedding, a birthday party or work thing-hence my vagueness).

The close proximity of her dumping her ex, and then getting pregnant, makes me think the kid isn't his.

So there should be mandatory testing because you have a hunch that some bloke isn’t the father of the kid his missus is carrying.

It would be cheaper and easier if you just minded your own business and let everyone deal with their own lives as they see fit.

Sile Na Gig

A little research shows that the data is skewed. Testing was voluntary so more people who suspected that their child wasn’t theirs went for the study. Even then more men were suspicious than were correct in their suspicion. This kind of thing gets my hackles up because it’s often the kind of rhetoric used by abusive partners. There is a woman in my community right now who has just had a baby and is being coercively controlled by the father- half the time he’s saying the baby isn’t his, the other half that she’s an unfit parent and he’ll take him away from her. There’s a strange neo-liberal obsession with being a cuck that feels all about shaming or scaring women.

By the same token I also know many wonderful step-fathers who willingly help raise their partner’s child, even going so far as to adopt them.

Sile Na Gig

A little research shows that the data is skewed. Testing was voluntary so more people who suspected that their child wasn’t theirs went for the study. Even then more men were suspicious than were correct in their suspicion. This kind of thing gets my hackles up because it’s often the kind of rhetoric used by abusive partners. There is a woman in my community right now who has just had a baby and is being coercively controlled by the father- half the time he’s saying the baby isn’t his, the other half that she’s an unfit parent and he’ll take him away from her. There’s a strange neo-liberal obsession with being a cuck that feels all about shaming or scaring women.

By the same token I also know many wonderful step-fathers who willingly help raise their partner’s child, even going so far as to adopt them.

VinLieger

JMNolan wrote: »

I thought I did answer the question. I'll explain it a bit better.

Mothers are already subject to legal penalties if they break the law. If deliberately deceiving a man into believing a child is his was made illegal then legal penalties should be applied. What you want to hear is "Ohhh we should lock her up!!!!" so you can reply with "wont someone think of the children".

Indeed sending a woman of a child to jail whose father quite possibly would also then not want to parent that child makes no sense for something as small as a lie.



The real question is why should this be a crime when the father can quite easily just go after the mother through a civil action?


Methinks you might be a bit close to this issue with the way you are posting about it.

Ush1

VinLieger wrote: »

Indeed sending a woman of a child to jail whose father quite possibly would also then not want to parent that child makes no sense for something as small as a lie.



The real question is why should this be a crime when the father can quite easily just go after the mother through a civil action?


Methinks you might be a bit close to this issue with the way you are posting about it.

:eek:

VinLieger

Ush1 wrote: »

:eek:

Between 2 people its big but as far as society punishing someone like this then why don't we punish people for lying about their ages to their partners or lying about their income, their previous family status, they didnt tell them they were married previously, they didn't tell them they had other kids? or multiple other possibilities that the criminal justice system has no business getting involved in? That again is what civil actions are for.

JMNolan

VinLieger wrote: »

Indeed sending a woman of a child to jail whose father quite possibly would also then not want to parent that child makes no sense for something as small as a lie.

Did I say jail?

Wibbs

VinLieger wrote: »

Between 2 people its big but as far as society punishing someone like this then why don't we punish people for lying about their ages to their partners or lying about their income, their previous family status, they didnt tell them they were married previously, they didn't tell them they had other kids? or multiple other possibilities that the criminal justice system has no business getting involved in? That again is what civil actions are for.

There's just a smidgeon of a difference between lying about what you earn and lying about the parentage of a child. Having read of the thankfully rare occasions where mothers later found out of a mixup in the hospital and the child they were raising wasn't their own. Horrendous emotional fallout. I don't see why fathers would just brush it off(they don't in the above scenario and that's a mistake rather than potential subterfuge). Beyond the logistics of it I don't see why genetic profiles at birth are such an issue? It would pretty much eliminate the hospital mixup and questions over parentage for both, so why the resistance?

Now we can go back and forth about guys who are stepfathers, but it comes down to choice. They choose to be and fair play to them for taking on such a responsible role. There's a huge difference between that and unknowingly raising a child that isn't yours, with the side order of deliberately keeping that fact hidden. That's the removal of choice over one's reproduction. Didn't we just fight for that right in the last referendum? The "not trusting women" is just deflection and hyperbole rolled out in such matters in my humble. I've often heard the same people who say that also weigh on on identity cards or online privacy and say what have you got to hide. Never mind that Women™ aren't a singular entity always to be [insert trait here] or not.

something as small as a lie.

I can't believe I read that TBH. You spend decades raising a child you think is yours and this is deliberately kept secret from you? Never mind the cheating that created said child. Unreal. Small as a lie my arse.

seamus

Sile Na Gig wrote: »

A little research shows that the data is skewed. Testing was voluntary so more people who suspected that their child wasn’t theirs went for the study.

I recall about twenty years ago a statistic being thrown around the US that one in four women were unfaithful in their marriage, and lots of people started going mad about it.

It turned out that the statistic came from a detective agency. That is, one in four women suspected of being unfaithful, were.

Which is a good statistic really; even if you are so sure that your wife is cheating that you'll hire someone to spy on her, the chances are 3:1 that she's not.

Likewise, this is a pretty good statistic; if you have some doubt over whether you're the father of your child, it's very unlikely that you're correct.

Overall I don't see much benefit in mandatory paternity testing. What's to be gained for society? A few extra ruined families? A few extra male suicides every year?

I have no issue with testing on request; any man being able to insist on a test in order to amend a child's birth cert. But mandatory testing is a draconian, authoritarian step IMHO.

VinLieger

VinLieger wrote: »

Indeed sending a woman of a child to jail whose father quite possibly would also then not want to parent that child makes no sense for something as small as a lie.



The real question is why should this be a crime when the father can quite easily just go after the mother through a civil action?


Methinks you might be a bit close to this issue with the way you are posting about it.

a lie? You mean a fraud that results in 18 years of theft. Yep when you see responses like that you think 'make it mandatory and matter of factly'.

seamus

seamus wrote: »

I recall about twenty years ago a statistic being thrown around the US that one in four women were unfaithful in their marriage, and lots of people started going mad about it.

It turned out that the statistic came from a detective agency. That is, one in four women suspected of being unfaithful, were.

Which is a good statistic really; even if you are so sure that your wife is cheating that you'll hire someone to spy on her, the chances are 3:1 that she's not.

Likewise, this is a pretty good statistic; if you have some doubt over whether you're the father of your child, it's very unlikely that you're correct.

Overall I don't see much benefit in mandatory paternity testing. What's to be gained for society? A few extra ruined families? A few extra male suicides every year?

I have no issue with testing on request; any man being able to insist on a test in order to amend a child's birth cert. But mandatory testing is a draconian, authoritarian step IMHO.

wow dont people see the thinking here to sweep things under the carper is the same crap that the church engaged in. 'Its all better for the greater good' allegedly

I call BS. Someone is just as likely to commit suicide after putting in a lifetime of work to find out they lived a lie and had their lives ruined
Making it mandatory and a normal thing eliminates a source of contention actually

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

I have no issue with testing on request; any man being able to insist on a test in order to amend a child's birth cert. But mandatory testing is a draconian, authoritarian step IMHO.

Yeah I'd be in a similar way of thinking myself. Mandatory would concern me. Though elective testing would be a hard sell to some. I can't see too many men, even ones with maybe good reasons to be suspicious broaching that subject. It being the done thing for everyone would remove that.

seamus

Deleted User wrote: »

wow dont people see the thinking here to sweep things under the carper is the same crap that the church engaged in. 'Its all better for the greater good' allegedly

Not sweeping under the carpet at all, but rather giving people the choice of knowledge. Some people have cheating partners and would rather not know. And will be more upset if they're told than they are about the actual cheating.

In the same way that people have a right to information about themselves if they should request it; they also have a right to not know if they don't want to. Mandatory testing forces people to know information that they may not want to know.
Of course, that information could just be recorded and only provided on request, but what good is that? And what happens when the child grows up and inadvertently finds out?

Someone is just as likely to commit suicide after putting in a lifetime of work to find out they lived a lie and had their lives ruined.

Exactly. Some people would rather not know.

Making it mandatory and a normal thing eliminates a source of contention actually

I see that thinking, but what is the gain? What does the man gain? What does the woman gain? What does the child gain? What does society gain?

Does anyone actually "win" in this scenario?

I understand the drive here, I understand what underpins the incredible hurt here. It's partially male ego - only raising your own seed and not being a "cuck". But there's the obvious trust bit too; discovering that a partner wasn't faithful and has been lying to your face for years, can only hurt.
And I have no issue with there being criminal sanctions if it can be proven that a woman knowingly duped a man into believing a child was his.

But mandatory testing, I don't see the benefit except for a minority of men who have trust issues.

endacl

VinLieger wrote: »

Grand so and what would you suggest the punishment should be? Really looking forward to hearing any option that doesn't in some way needlessly hurt the child involved

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

I understand the drive here, I understand what underpins the incredible hurt here. It's partially male ego - only raising your own seed and not being a "cuck". But there's the obvious trust bit too; discovering that a partner wasn't faithful and has been lying to your face for years, can only hurt.

It's got nada to do with the recent nonsense of being a "cuck". One of the biggest things any animal will do is reproduce. It's what animals including humans do. And that drive is fundamentally to reproduce one's own genetics. The emotional hurt from cheating comes from a large part of that. Doubly so for men in this particular situation as any offspring a woman has she's 99% sure is hers. Maternity testing is pretty much a non thing for this reason. In humans and other social animals there is the group raising of kids, some of whom may not be directly related. The village raises the children angle. Stepparents would plug into that, though as I pointed out stepparents make that choice going in and cultures that practice this also make the choice to do so.

In law the protection of personal choice is right up there in importance. In the recent referendum one aspect of it was women who had been raped having the option of termination of a pregnancy resulting from that. And damn right too. On top of the terrible physical and emotional assault their reproductive choice is removed. I don't see why that aspect of reproductive choice is seen as mostly a non issue for men.

But mandatory testing, I don't see the benefit except for a minority of men who have trust issues.

You might have added for some balance; "and for a minority of women who are untrustworthy", but you didn't, which does suggest some bias on the matter.

Adamocovic

Sile Na Gig wrote: »

Mandatory paternity testing sounds a bit oppressive. Most people know who the father of their child is. I don’t know how you would come up with the 1/25 stat. Surely you don’t know what you don’t know.

I was at a party with my OH when I was pregnant with my third child and someone conversationally asked my husband how he knew that the child was his. I was completely blindsided.

It feels like there’s a certain cohort of posters that have issues with trusting women.

At first I would have agreed with you about it sounding somewhat oppressive, then I read an interesting point suggesting it should be introduced in order to add proof when adding the fathers name to the birth certificate.

The above point for me has nothing to do with trusting the woman but rather from a legal standpoint. It makes sense to me that not only some people but even the Government would want evidence for a legally required document that is added to the registry.

I agree the article seems hard to follow in terms of where concrete evidence comes from. A lot of taking previous studies and using that information for estimates which could be giving figures too high or too low. Generally when paternity tests are demanded it's in untrustworthy relationships. I know in the UK quite a number of paternity tests are demanded each year and roughly 48% of the time it is proven the man isn't the father. So a slight majority of the time is a case of either the man hoping he isn't or being paranoid, but still sees a high percent who find out they are not. This is usually regarding not wanting to pay for child support for a child they believe not to be there's however.

I know of someone who probably knows all about this sort of thing. I used to go to school with a guy who moved away. Didn't speak to him after but added him on Facebook. Saw him post about his kid and partner/gf quite a lot, park photos, days out etc. Then one day came online to a status by him, basically said he knew people already had known for months, but turns out they had an argument and she confessed the child wasn't even his in the heat of the argument. So after the words were planted he decided to get a test. Turns out it wasn't his child. However in his post he said he would still raise the child as his own but basically he was through with the mother. I think it turned out the child's biological father wanted nothing to do with it, I'm not sure if she then decided to come after him for child support. Now was mad this was all on facebook. Wouldn't have known about it if he didn't post it! Not using it as a point in all this but I may never have another time where I have a story relevant to the subject :P

On the people with issues trusting women I think that really goes both ways. Not only on the internet but in real life you see both men and women who have trust issues regarding their same or opposite gender.

Cleopatra_

Jaysus. I don't even know how I find time to post on boards with all of my whoring around with men trying to trap them into parenthood with babies that aren't theirs. It's exhausting, truly.

Considering that this is a rare occurrence then paternity testing on request is more than adequate.

VinLieger

Wibbs wrote: »

I can't believe I read that TBH. You spend decades raising a child you think is yours and this is deliberately kept secret from you? Never mind the cheating that created said child. Unreal. Small as a lie my arse.

But in essence it is a lie, trying to categorise the levels of deception between two people so we can legislate and criminalise them is a bonkers idea in my opinion.

Ush1

VinLieger wrote: »

But in essence it is a lie, trying to categorise the levels of deception between two people so we can legislate and criminalise them is a bonkers idea in my opinion.

Committing fraud is lying. You can commit theft by simply lying.

seamus

Wibbs wrote: »

It's got nada to do with the recent nonsense of being a "cuck". One of the biggest things any animal will do is reproduce. It's what animals including humans do. And that drive is fundamentally to reproduce one's own genetics. The emotional hurt from cheating comes from a large part of that.

That's exactly what I mean. "Cuckold" is a very old concept, entire religions and huge chunks of our traditions and ceremonies revolve historically around the man protecting his reproductive imperative, ensuring that he's not raising some other man's child.

I'm not ignoring the social or mental aspect of that for men. It's incredibly strong, and it's not an issue that women ever have to consider.

But it's also on a grand scale, a conceptual problem rather than an actual problem. Without getting into the philosophical, in the end it doesn't matter whose genes are in the kids that you call your children. It won't kill you or harm your health or otherwise result in a bad outcome for you...until you find out.

It's interesting that you mention choice, because yes, men should absolutely have the ability to choose whether they raise their child or someone else's. But exercising that choice doesn't require that we test every child for paternity.

In fact, much like women's choices, there are many tests available which might lead a woman to choose abortion; but none of them are mandatory.
Perhaps a little more involvement of the father in any birth is what's called for; send every new father an information pack which includes some basic leaflets and a simple question (amongst others); "Would you like a paternity test". Then the man is free to choose whether he wants one or not and whether he wants to deal with the outcome of that knowledge.

You might have added for some balance; "and for a minority of women who are untrustworthy", but you didn't, which does suggest some bias on the matter.

Well, no. Mandatory testing wouldn't be of benefit to women who are untrustworthy. Why would I say that?

eviltwin

Sile Na Gig wrote: »

Mandatory paternity testing sounds a bit oppressive. Most people know who the father of their child is. I don’t know how you would come up with the 1/25 stat. Surely you don’t know what you don’t know.

I was at a party with my OH when I was pregnant with my third child and someone conversationally asked my husband how he knew that the child was his. I was completely blindsided.

It feels like there’s a certain cohort of posters that have issues with trusting women.

There's a small minority of men upset women got abortion rights at the weekend. They have to find some way to stick it to them.

_Brian

Why would we try and legislate for our social problems.

Have we gone so far down a road of social collapse that we need to legislate for every potential outcome.

If a father feels there is a chance this has happened then he can chase testing if he wants but why place the burden on everyone.

Adamocovic

Cleopatra_ wrote: »

Jaysus. I don't even know how I find time to post on boards with all of my whoring around with men trying to trap them into parenthood with babies that aren't theirs. It's exhausting, truly.

Considering that this is a rare occurrence then paternity testing on request is more than adequate.

Could be wrong here but haven't noticed any lewd comments like the one you are sarcastically remarking.

The problem there would be for mandatory paternity testing would be the financing. I'm sure the government wont pay the fee of ~€175 (roughly €11/€13 million a year) and there would be stern opposition about any idea of forcing parents to pay this.

I do, like I stated before, find it interesting however that regarding the birth certificate, a legally required document, no legally required proof is demanded from the father, when he is listed in the registry.

But on that, I'm sorry if wrong here, my understanding is that if they couple are married the husband is automatically added as the father. For unwed couples the mother gives the fathers name, and if not present they will get in touch with him.

Like I said, not saying it should be mandatory as that would be a complicated procedure to introduce but in terms of just the workings involving birth certificates and the national registry this debate or point has been very interesting for me.

Adamocovic

VinLieger wrote: »

But in essence it is a lie, trying to categorise the levels of deception between two people so we can legislate and criminalise them is a bonkers idea in my opinion.

You guys do realise Paternity Fraud exists in the UK and other regions?

It's not a criminal offence but can see damages being awarded to either party.

zapitastas

VinLieger wrote: »

Grand so and what would you suggest the punishment should be? Really looking forward to hearing any option that doesn't in some way needlessly hurt the child involved

Reimbursement for whatever costs the child has accrued would do it.

eviltwin

I can't see this taking off. What if I admit to having a fling and name someone other than my husband as the father? Will we test every single man named? Seems this idea is more about shaming people, namely women, for extra curricular sex.

JMNolan

VinLieger wrote: »

But in essence it is a lie, trying to categorise the levels of deception between two people so we can legislate and criminalise them is a bonkers idea in my opinion.

I'm truly confused as to how you think deception between two people cannot be legislated for. There are many instances in law where deception between two people is already criminalized and legislated for.

VinLieger

Ush1 wrote: »

Committing fraud is lying. You can commit theft by simply lying.

Indeed it is, now try to prove to the level required in court that the lie was intentional for the financial gain of the mother which would be required to prove fraud.


When I say "just a lie" im talking legally obviously, to the people involved its much more than a lie but when talking in the sense of the original poster who wanted to criminalise it then it is "just a lie" and how do your criminalise a lie where its virtually impossible to prove knowledge of or intent for financial gain which would be required in the case of fraud?

JMNolan

eviltwin wrote: »

I can't see this taking off. What if I admit to having a fling and name someone other than my husband as the father? Will we test every single man named? Seems this idea is more about shaming people, namely women, for extra curricular sex.

You only need to test one man to determine if he isn't the father.

Cleopatra_

Adamocovic wrote: »

You guys do realise Paternity Fraud exists in the UK and other regions?

It's not a criminal offence but can see damages being awarded to either party.

I'd have an issue with paternity fraud being a criminal offence (are we going to make adultery a criminal offence next?) but I wouldn't have an issue with a man seeking financial compensation for a child that wasn't his that he unknowingly raised.

eviltwin

JMNolan wrote: »

You only need to test one man to determine if he isn't the father.

So it's not about identifying the biological parent? Then it just becomes an exercise in shaming women.

Dyr

For health reasons alone it should be

If everyone on your actual fathers side were brown bread by 60 you might want to know about that.

JMNolan

eviltwin wrote: »

So it's not about identifying the biological parent? Then it just becomes an exercise in shaming women.

No, it's about proving that the man named as the father is not the father. You must understand that surely, it's only purpose is to prove who isn't the father or to confirm who is. Surely the child is entitled to know this information?

VinLieger

JMNolan wrote: »

I'm truly confused as to how you think deception between two people cannot be legislated for. There are many instances in law where deception between two people is already criminalized and legislated for.

Indeed but its deception with a gain for one party like in the case of fraud.