Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dad finds out that none of his kids are biologically his.

Options
12346

Comments

  • Options
    #152
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    That's exactly why I'm saying it should be automatic, to avoid this. Fundamentally, I don't believe that any human being is 100% trustworthy. I've been f*cked over often enough by people close to me who I genuinely trusted that I just don't believe in blind faith anymore. Performing these tests as a standard part of post-natal care eliminates that entire problem from the equation.
    To what end though? The data suggests that this is pretty uncommon, so it seems like an unnecessary expense to satisfy the paranoia of a small number of people. You suggest a solution to a problem that doesn't really exist. If you're concerned about the paternity of your children, then don't have any.

    From another perspective it could be viewed as reducing the process of pregnancy to something more formal and legal.

    "I'm just going to take a sample from you sir so we can test to ensure you are the father". That automatically introduces an sinister aspect to what should be a joyful day.
    Otherwise, like I said, every man has a choice between paternal certainty or his relationship. Doesn't seem remotely fair to me.
    If paternal certainty is in question, then so is your relationship.


  • Options
    #153
    joe40
    Registered Users Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭joe40


    I have 2 kids, 15 and 13. I am 100% their biological father zero doubt.

    But lets just assume, hypothetically speaking, I were to find out I'm not their biological father. Well it would affect my relationship with their Mother but after all these years it would not affect the way I feel about the kids.

    I also would not feel cheated out of any resources I put into rearing those kids, nor would I stop at this stage. They're my youngsters at this stage regardless of genetics.


  • Options
    #154
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    That's exactly why I'm saying it should be automatic, to avoid this. Fundamentally, I don't believe that any human being is 100% trustworthy. I've been f*cked over often enough by people close to me who I genuinely trusted that I just don't believe in blind faith anymore. Performing these tests as a standard part of post-natal care eliminates that entire problem from the equation. Otherwise, like I said, every man has a choice between paternal certainty or his relationship. Doesn't seem remotely fair to me.
    Do you believe that YOU'RE not 100% trustworthy? If you're gonna say yeah and refer to tiny things, doesn't count - as that's a world away from being horrendous enough to have sex with other men resulting in pregnancy and having your husband or partner believe that he is the child(ren)'s father. That is another dimension of psycho and hardly anyone would behave in such a manner, so of course women wouldn't like the suspicion of them being capable of such a thing.


  • Options
    #155
    Outlaw Pete
    Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    Mucking about with mates in the 80's during the summer we'd often start slagging the odd chap about how his brother or sister must have been the result of his ma shagging some sailor down the docks. We'd only be messing at the time of course, not really meaning it, nor even thinking there'd be any truth to it but jaysus looking back there was the odd family for sure were it must have been true on distant reflection.

    I mean, you'd have potatoe headed freckle families who'd all be walking with stoops, club foots and limps, conspicuously have one olive skinned family member with dark hair and eyes and while at eight or nine years old nobody would really pay much attention, at 14 or 15 when they strode out of the house like an adonis, shining in the sun during the summer to play ball with us on the green, you couldn't help but ponder the weekend extracurricular activities of Mrs Clancy.


  • Options
    #156
    Hector Savage
    Registered Users Posts: 8,810 ✭✭✭Hector Savage


    valoren wrote: »
    And she got £4 million from their divorce.
    Her reputation, in whatever life she lives, is destroyed.

    She's a maligant f'ucking c'unt !


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #157
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    That's exactly why I'm saying it should be automatic, to avoid this. Fundamentally, I don't believe that any human being is 100% trustworthy. I've been f*cked over often enough by people close to me who I genuinely trusted that I just don't believe in blind faith anymore. Performing these tests as a standard part of post-natal care eliminates that entire problem from the equation. Otherwise, like I said, every man has a choice between paternal certainty or his relationship. Doesn't seem remotely fair to me.

    Testing being mandatory at birth is the best solution as it means the avoidance of awkward relationship moments and saves a man from pouring years and years of resources, both financial and emotional, into children that aren’t his.

    But this testing will need to be both cheap and easy or else it’s not happening. Cheap being the most important thing.

    Another thing, in a healthy relationship, you need to trust your partner. There’s not much of a relationship there otherwise. I’d imagine that most men who request paternity testing already have some suspicions (many justified, I’m sure). I can’t see it happening randomly in a healthy relationship.


  • Options
    #158
    josip
    Registered Users Posts: 13,637 ✭✭✭✭josip


    Hector Savage wrote: »

    She's a maligant f'ucking c'unt !


    Ooh.
    https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/character/stormrage/maligant


  • Options
    #159
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Testing being mandatory at birth is the best solution as it means the avoidance of awkward relationship moments and saves a man from pouring years and years of resources, both financial and emotional, into children that aren’t his.
    If he's concerned though he can get the test done without having to inform anyone. Swab from him, swab from the baby, job done.

    As josip says, if it were to turn out (somehow) that my kids weren't mine, I wouldn't consider it years of "resources" wasted. I didn't have children as an investment.

    So I don't see the need for the state to facilitate this because all women are potential whores. How many relationships will be ruined by false negatives?

    If you're worried, get the test done. If it's a match, then throw the results away and treat your partner better as penance for doubting them.


  • Options
    #160
    Muckka
    Registered Users Posts: 498 ✭✭Muckka


    Outlaw Pete wrote: »
    Mucking about with mates in the 80's during the summer we'd often start slagging the odd chap about how his brother or sister must have been the result of his ma shagging some sailor down the docks. We'd only be messing at the time of course, not really meaning it, nor even thinking there'd be any truth to it but jaysus looking back there was the odd family for sure were it must have been true on distant reflection.

    I mean, you'd have potatoe headed freckle families who'd all be walking with stoops, club foots and limps, conspicuously have one olive skinned family member with dark hair and eyes and while at eight or nine years old nobody would really pay much attention, at 14 or 15 when they strode out of the house like an adonis, shining in the sun during the summer to play ball with us on the green, you couldn't help but ponder the weekend extracurricular activities of Mrs Clancy.

    There's a Mrs Clancy in our neighborhood too.
    Supposedly Mr Clancy has Eyetalion ancestry...
    But you wouldn't think it.

    Going way back to the 80's , young Seamus looked really well on our breakdance crew, he was very stealthy looking, stood out.
    All the girls loved him.

    He was a sound lad, great scrapper too...faught like an eye talion

    He had brown Coco skin and curly black hair,
    Just the way he looked at you with that gentle loving stare....


  • Options
    #161
    joe40
    Registered Users Posts: 3,811 ✭✭✭joe40


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Testing being mandatory at birth is the best solution as it means the avoidance of awkward relationship moments and saves a man from pouring years and years of resources, both financial and emotional, into children that aren’t his.

    But this testing will need to be both cheap and easy or else it’s not happening. Cheap being the most important thing.

    Another thing, in a healthy relationship, you need to trust your partner. There’s not much of a relationship there otherwise. I’d imagine that most men who request paternity testing already have some suspicions (many justified, I’m sure). I can’t see it happening randomly in a healthy relationship.

    What about false negatives, they can happen. Also who would pay for this.

    Frankly it is a silly suggestion and won't happen


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #162
    greencap
    Registered Users Posts: 2,102 ✭✭✭greencap


    Wibbs wrote: »
    "It's not the woman's fault at all". Yep I think we can all agree that's crazy stuff, but in the dafter regions of mainstream feminism that's not a particularly odd thing to think or say. It's quite common in fact. The "women are agentless victims and men are to blame" credo again.

    Ooooh.

    Bitter.

    discussion/2058195983/russia-threadbanned-users-in-op/p3135

    😁



  • Options
    #163
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Muckka wrote: »
    There's a Mrs Clancy in our neighborhood too.
    Supposedly Mr Clancy has Eyetalion ancestry...
    But you wouldn't think it.

    Going way back to the 80's , young Seamus looked really well on our breakdance crew, he was very stealthy looking, stood out.
    All the girls loved him.

    He was a sound lad, great scrapper too...faught like an eye talion

    He had brown Coco skin and curly black hair,
    Just the way he looked at you with that gentle loving stare....


    took me a minute to remember where the last two lines were from.


  • Options
    #164
    Hector Savage
    Registered Users Posts: 8,810 ✭✭✭Hector Savage


    Fiery mutant wrote: »
    So a woman with no apparent talent of her own gets 4 million in divorce, just because she happened to marry someone who was an entrepreneur and a hard worker who would work his ass off to give his family a great life.

    Said hard working man who spent his life busting his gut for his family, then finds his whole married life was a con, then only gets awarded €250k for his trouble.

    What a ****ed up world we live in.

    Yep law is all for women, nothing for men, and then they go on about a totally fictional "wage gap"
    I'm so lucky my wife is nothing like this, there seems to be so much absolute fukcing bitchy c*nts out there.

    She should be forced to pay ALL the 4 Million back, let her lie on her back and charge for it.

    I have more respect for street hookers then c'unts like this, at least the street hooker is honest about what they do.


  • Options
    #165
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    seamus wrote: »
    If he's concerned though he can get the test done without having to inform anyone. Swab from him, swab from the baby, job done.

    As josip says, if it were to turn out (somehow) that my kids weren't mine, I wouldn't consider it years of "resources" wasted. I didn't have children as an investment.

    So I don't see the need for the state to facilitate this because all women are potential whores. How many relationships will be ruined by false negatives?

    If you're worried, get the test done. If it's a match, then throw the results away and treat your partner better as penance for doubting them.

    No mention of seeing your children as an investment. In fact the bit you bolded from my post is recognition that a lot of what spent on your children is money down the drain. And if those children aren’t yours, that’s money down the drain that somebody else should have been paying. You’d form a bond with the children but if you had known from the start that they weren’t yours, that bonding wouldn’t have happened and you’d be no worse of emotionally or financially. You wouldn’t miss a future emotional bond you haven’t yet experienced and won’t if you discover at birth that the child isn’t yours.


  • Options
    #166
    Muckka
    Registered Users Posts: 498 ✭✭Muckka


    ohnonotgmail wrote: »
    took me a minute to remember where the last two lines were from.

    An old house tune from the 90's


  • Options
    #167
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    greencap wrote: »
    Ooooh.

    Bitter.
    Not a bit bitter. The post he's quoting is pure nonsense.


  • Options
    #168
    Gimme A Pound
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,482 ✭✭✭Gimme A Pound


    Hector Savage wrote: »
    there seems to be so much absolute fukcing bitchy c*nts out there.
    Yeah female and male - this isn't new.

    Most people are grand like your wife.


  • Options
    #169
    valoren
    Registered Users Posts: 5,458 ✭✭✭valoren


    Between sexual partners then this is really the egregious thing that can happen to a man.
    There is the double whammy of not only being duped into believing the child is yours but the fact that you partner cheated on you as well and has been living a lie e.g. telling the child to 'Ask Daddy' knowing she is lying to not only her partner but also her child.

    Once is vindictive enough and to do it three times is incredible. A cnut of the highest order would only do that.
    It isn't easy raising children. I can imagine the anger the man feels about it all. Clearly he wanted a family and through all the sh1tty nappies and the tantrums, he still loved and bonded with his children. Being duped into raising another man's offspring? Three of them? Fcking hell.

    As for mandatory paternity tests, if you feel any doubt at all, then the bigger question is why are you involved with someone who instilled any inkling of doubt in you but actively having a family with this person you have trust issues with.


  • Options
    #170
    ohnonotgmail
    Registered Users Posts: 40,149 ✭✭✭✭ohnonotgmail


    Muckka wrote: »
    An old house tune from the 90's


    I know.


  • Options
    #171
    BrokenArrows
    Registered Users Posts: 7,500 ✭✭✭BrokenArrows


    givyjoe wrote: »
    Consent from all parties is required for these tests no? Clinics will not do the tests or give results unless both consent to the test.

    Open to correction but someone close to me had to go through the above to have something similar confirmed.

    You could just use the likes of "my heritage" DNA tests. They don't do paternity tests directly but when two people do them you can compare the results and see the % chance of being related.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #172
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    you’d be no worse of emotionally or financially. You wouldn’t miss a future emotional bond you haven’t yet experienced and won’t if you discover at birth that the child isn’t yours.
    And if your uncle had tits he'd be your auntie.

    The same point holds though.

    If we take the absolute hypothetical that I discover one or more of my kids isn't mine, would I prefer that we had never bonded, that we had never had a parent/child relationship?

    No.

    That's not an argument for, "Everyone should just bring up the children they're given and shut up". But the argument that "you won't sink resources into kids that aren't yours" doesn't hold weight either.

    I would not at any stage consider time or money spent on my kids to be "wasted", no matter what the future may hold.

    If someone is paranoid enough that they're incapable of trusting a partner to be faithful, then I would suggest that rather than paternity test your newborn, just don't let it get that far in the first place.


  • Options
    #173
    0cp71eyxkb94qf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 198 ✭✭0cp71eyxkb94qf


    valoren wrote: »

    As for mandatory paternity tests, if you feel any doubt at all, then the bigger question is why are you involved with someone who instilled any inkling of doubt in you but actively having a family with this person you have trust issues with.

    This again.

    It isn't about trust issues. It is about preventing things like this from happening. I would imagine this person trusted their partner and he would never had dreamed that she would be as reprehensible as she has been exposed as being. If mandatory testing was implemented, he would have been aware of this from the outset.

    This isn't about gender. There are people out there that will intentionally dupe good people and nothing will ever change this. Using emotional blackmail like, "he doesn't love or trust me" is why mandatory DNA testing needs to be implemented.


  • Options
    #174
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    seamus wrote: »
    And if your uncle had tits he'd be your auntie.

    The same point holds though.

    If we take the absolute hypothetical that I discover one or more of my kids isn't mine, would I prefer that we had never bonded, that we had never had a parent/child relationship?

    No.

    That's not an argument for, "Everyone should just bring up the children they're given and shut up". But the argument that "you won't sink resources into kids that aren't yours" doesn't hold weight either.

    I would not at any stage consider time or money spent on my kids to be "wasted", no matter what the future may hold.

    If someone is paranoid enough that they're incapable of trusting a partner to be faithful, then I would suggest that rather than paternity test your newborn, just don't let it get that far in the first place.

    Really? It’s a bond that wouldn’t have existed had you known at birth. Of course, by now you have bonded, so you’d not be able to hand those years back. But you can’t miss what you haven’t experienced so if you had found out at birth that you weren’t the babydaddy, I just don’t know if you’d even consider the future bond that could have formed. Bonding is a cumulative experience I’d imagine and you’d be at day 1, or a few days in, however long it would take. There’d be no relationship to miss.


  • Options
    #175
    josip
    Registered Users Posts: 13,637 ✭✭✭✭josip


    'Trust' is a recurring topic among posters here.
    Would those in favour of the state DNA testing everyone at birth, also trust the state with all that DNA data for the lifetime of their children?


  • Options
    #176
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »
    Really? It’s a bond that wouldn’t have existed had you known at birth. Of course, by now you have bonded, so you’d not be able to hand those years back. But you can’t miss what you haven’t experienced so if you had found out at birth that you weren’t the babydaddy, I just don’t know if you’d even consider the future bond that could have formed. Bonding is a cumulative experience I’d imagine and you’d be at day 1, or a few days in, however long it would take. There’d be no relationship to miss.
    I get that. But it's hypothetical.

    I wouldn't regret it. I wouldn't be thinking, "I wish I had known from day one". It doesn't automatically follow that knowing from day one is better than not knowing.


  • Options
    #177
    0cp71eyxkb94qf
    Closed Accounts Posts: 198 ✭✭0cp71eyxkb94qf


    josip wrote: »
    'Trust' is a recurring topic among posters here.
    Would those in favour of the state DNA testing everyone at birth, also trust the state with all that DNA data for the lifetime of their children?

    Why would the state have to keep DNA data for the lifetime of the children? We have moved on from emotional blackmail to state incompetence. What next?


  • Options
    #178
    Obvious Desperate Breakfasts
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,474 ✭✭✭Obvious Desperate Breakfasts


    seamus wrote: »
    I get that. But it's hypothetical.

    I wouldn't regret it. I wouldn't be thinking, "I wish I had known from day one". It doesn't automatically follow that knowing from day one is better than not knowing.

    Well, you’d have all the facts. You could make an informed decision as to whether to raise the child as your own. You’d also be able to figure out if your relationship could weather the deceit. Some can, I’m sure. But you would not have been taken for a chump. I’d consider all the above factors as making it better than not knowing. That’s just me, we are all different.


  • Options
    #179
    josip
    Registered Users Posts: 13,637 ✭✭✭✭josip


    Avalyn Scarce Gear wrote: »
    Why would the state have to keep DNA data for the lifetime of the children? We have moved on from emotional blackmail to state incompetence. What next?


    They wouldn't have to keep it, but they could.
    It wasn't incompetence I was thinking of, but the likelihood that the state would at some stage start using that DNA data in ways we wouldn't like.

    "Sorry kiddo, your DNA shows that your life expectancy is below the 10th percentile, so it doesn't make economic sense letting you have 3rd level education."


  • Options
    #180
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    josip wrote: »
    They wouldn't have to keep it, but they could.
    It wasn't incompetence I was thinking of, but the likelihood that the state would at some stage start using that DNA data in ways we wouldn't like.

    "Sorry kiddo, your DNA shows that your life expectancy is below the 10th percentile, so it doesn't make economic sense letting you have 3rd level education."

    the whattest of bouttery


    seamus, thats a nice sentiment and fair play but id imagine its impossible to put yourself into that situation and accurately predict how youd feel


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #181
    Riskymove
    Registered Users Posts: 10,885 ✭✭✭✭Riskymove


    seamus wrote: »
    It doesn't automatically follow that knowing from day one is better than not knowing.

    context is everything

    you can see allusions to the AH Young Man's Nightmare anecdote where someone they sleep with becomes pregnant. There are always plenty of "get a test" type advices etc.

    If someone has entered a relationship on such a basis and subsequently discovered that they were not the father I can see how they would react very differently to, for example, someone who entered a long term relationship and subsequently has children over time


Advertisement