You are Not the Father

Nathan said:
Father's are ordered to pay child support already, paternity being established on a case by case basis, particularly if the father disputes the paternal connection. In some cases a non-paternal parent can be ordered to pay child support for a child who is not blood related, if they lived in a household together.
Click to expand...
Yes, of course, if one parent or both requests establishing paternity through legal means. I'm just wondering if one of the purposes of making it mandatory to determine the paternity of every newborn is to reduce state spending.

Potentially, millions of children (of single mothers) would be ineligible for most social services if it's found their fathers are gainfully employed. That isn't unfair, really. It's more unfair that taxpayers are paying to raise the children of millions of single, unemployed mothers on AFDC.

It's also tragic for the children that social services programs are extremely flawed. They don't set kids up for a successful future, that's for sure. If they did, it would be a fair exchange for taxpayers. IMO, that's what needs to be fixed. Social services needs 100% reformation.
 
Murrmurr said:
Yes, of course, if one parent or both requests establishing paternity through legal means. I'm just wondering if one of the purposes of making it mandatory to determine the paternity of every newborn is to reduce state spending.

Potentially, millions of children (of single mothers) would be ineligible for most social services if it's found their fathers are gainfully employed. That isn't unfair, really. It's more unfair that taxpayers are paying to raise the children of millions of single, unemployed mothers on AFDC.

It's also tragic for the children that social services programs are extremely flawed. They don't set kids up for a successful future, that's for sure. If they did, it would be a fair exchange for taxpayers. IMO, that's what needs to be fixed. Social services needs 100% reformation.
Click to expand...
Paternity often only rules someone out as the father, doesn't necessarily identify who is. That would be a very expensive process (at least using today's technology) and would involve the government having everyone's DNA to establish matches.

Thanks but no thanks.
 
StarSong said:
Paternity often only rules someone out as the father, doesn't necessarily identify who is. That would be a very expensive process (at least using today's technology) and would involve the government having everyone's DNA to establish matches.

Thanks but no thanks.
Click to expand...
It does if you have the father's DNA.

Mandatory testing of every newborn in the US, then entering and storing it in a database that would have to be created, managed, and regulated - that would not be cheap. And taxpayers would continually fund it. I don't see how that would benefit anyone.
 
Last edited:
StarSong said:
Paternity often only rules someone out as the father, doesn't necessarily identify who is. That would be a very expensive process (at least using today's technology) and would involve the government having everyone's DNA to establish matches.

Thanks but no thanks.
Click to expand...
Sorry, there's now enough of a data base not only to rule out paternity, but to identify the biological father for some, at least for the last 4-5 generations. PBS's "Finding Your Roots" has done that several times. I was always very reluctant to have my DNA tested, fearful of what someone could do with that. But since, there's such a huge data base, they can come close to predicting your DNA, it really didn't matter. When I was tested, the amount of information in DNA is immense. I was blown away by having Mexican ancestry only 18 years after Columbus stepped a shore.
 
Murrmurr said:
It does if you have the father's DNA.

Mandatory testing of every newborn in the US, then entering and storing a database that would have to be created, managed, and regulated - that would not be cheap. And taxpayers would continually fund it. I don't see how that would benefit anyone.
Click to expand...
It also sounds very creepy. It reminds me of one of the themes that pushed the main story in X-Files.
 
Murrmurr said:
I wonder if the point is to save money on AFDC benefits. If the real father is working (and the mother is not married), he could be ordered to pay child support and medical insurance.
Click to expand...
This is interesting. My mother bragged that she never went for my bio-dad's military retirement or any other support from him. Well of course not, she didn't have to. First we were on welfare after she left him and then she snared my stepfather with his good county job and benefits. If she didn't marry him, I know for sure she would have gone after the bio dad's money. Didn't fool me.
 
VaughanJB said:
Apparently, a third of all paternity tests show that the "father" is no such thing. Along with this, it is estimated 11% of all births if tested, would reveal the "father" was not actually, the father.

So the question is, would you be in favor of mandatory testing for all newborns?
Click to expand...
am certainly not in favour of mandatory testing of all newborns. Or of anybody

Testing is available now i n those circumstances which warrant it.

Also one has to be careful with statistics - I can understand 1/3 of tests taken could show the man is not the father. But that is obviously a skewed demographic - since tests are only taken when paternity is disputed.

Not sure how they extrapolate from that to 11% of all births (and of course one has to rule out births where the man is known not to be the father - sperm donations etc )

I would think that estimated statistic is extremely unlikely IRL
 
VaughanJB said:
Apparently, a third of all paternity tests show that the "father" is no such thing. Along with this, it is estimated 11% of all births if tested, would reveal the "father" was not actually, the father.

So the question is, would you be in favor of mandatory testing for all newborns?
Click to expand...
scrappy referencing!! - no identification of source of information - you could be simply inventing it all??
 
When I got my vasectomy, I was reading the literature before the procedure.

One of the frequently asked questions was ,"What if I get an erection during the procedure?" The Doctor answers...

"I've done over 25,000 vasectomy operations and only one patient had an erection during the procedure. It was no cause for concern."

So now I'm thinking GREAT! What if I'm only the SECOND patient out of over 25,000 men to get an erection during the operation!? :(

Anyhoo, it all worked out...just a bit of bruising for a few days and that was it.
 
Warrigal said:
And if they don't pay? Who benefits? Certainly not the baby or the mother.
Click to expand...
If AFDC benefits included things like private tutors when the kids lag behind in school, job skills in high school, and continued education, they would be better prepared for a successful life, and become taxpayers themselves .

And why limit mom to an insufficient amount of food stamps and monthly checks that barely cover the bills (and then stop those measly benefits when the baby is 18)? Mom should be getting career training and employment assistance, then she can become a taxpayer as well.

I don't mind paying taxes for AFDC, but it infuriates me that the money is not only wasted, it actually creates more AFDC dependents.
 
VisualBrian said:
I'm not in favor of most anything being mandatory, but that aside, it would probably result in even more children growing up without a male role model.
Click to expand...

I think that's reasonable. I get the feelings about it being mandatory. But the second point.... you're probably correct, but then if that's the reality, then it is what it is.

jujube said:
I'm not sure it would do much good. It would be devastating if the putative father wasn't the father and I'm sure it wouldn't do much good if it were proved that somebody else was. In most cases, it would be unlikely that the "real" father would step up and do his manly duty or provide financial support for the child.
Click to expand...

Isn't that a matter of perspective? I mean, it wouldn't do much good for the mother and child, but it would do a whole lot of good for the father. Imagine living a lie for your entire life, and that's the reality for the child and the father.

Pepper said:
For what purpose? DNA paternity testing is available for those who WANT it. I don't understand the nature of your question.
Click to expand...

Simple. At 10%, we're at a point where there are simply too many people being led to live a lie. Emotional manipulation, coercion, and hell - wanting to believe your partner isn't cheating, often means we don't take sufficient stops to reach the truth.

My question to you is - wouldn't you want to know that the father to your children really IS the father? I mean in terms of if there was doubt. Do you not think it matters? Not to mention, if your partner announced he wanted paternity tests, would you not take it as a slight? Again, imagine yourself in a more promiscuous circumstance. Do you think paternity matters?

Murrmurr said:
I agree. I see no purpose in making paternity tests mandatory.

People seem to forget that making anything mandatory by law costs taxpayers millions.
Click to expand...

Well, giving birth costs money, and this would simply be another charge. Do you think true paternity matters? If there is doubt, would you be happy to roill the dice and assume fatherhood?

davey said:
a child is a child is a child that's wot matters?
Click to expand...

It matters a LOT. Especially when you're on the hook for someone else's child for 18 years.

Not to mention, we're moving into a world where our genetics can be examined for inherited dangers. Doesn't every child deserve to know who their parents are?

George1959 said:
It's problematic, even if there is a suspicion of adultery of the wife. If the husband demands the test and he is not the father, he may leave his wife. If he is the father she may leave him.
Click to expand...

As opposed to living a lie? The father is the father - it's his responsibility to care for his offspring, no? If I found out my wife had been cheating, and had become pregnant, I'd probably leave her. Is that wrong?

Nathan said:
What would be the point? Paternity issues would civil, for determining child support / child custody.
Click to expand...

Hm. Why doesn't it matter, if it's civil? Assuming you have children, does it not matter to you that they're your own? Think of that in terms of now (we're all old) and at the time of birth. I mean, you're dealing with infidelity, and all the doubt that brings into life. Then you're dealing with a child and what that means. Then you're dealing with the financial ramifications.


JBR said:
What nation are these stats from?
Click to expand...

US.


Let me ask everyone another question: Do you care if your children are yours? If someone else fathered them, would you want to know?
 
Let me ask everyone another question: Do you care if your children are yours? If someone else fathered them, would you want to know?

Why should it be Mandatory? I know the father of my children, and if I didn't they are still MY children. This is why Judaism is passed through the mother. The father is superfluous. Can't stand that, right?
 
@VaughanJB

"Well, giving birth costs money, and this would simply be another charge. Do you think true paternity matters? If there is doubt, would you be happy to roll the dice and assume fatherhood?"

True paternity matters to sons and daughters.

What would simply be another charge? The DNA testing? Single or not, would the mother be charged if it's mandatory? DNA testing to establish paternity has nothing to do with anything used or done during the infant's delivery and care, and it isn't a medical necessity, so why would anyone be charged?

Not sure what you mean by roll the dice and assume fatherhood. I've assumed fatherhood while I was doing foster care. I've been in serious relationships with women who had children and treated their children as though they were my own (but within her boundaries).

Or by "roll the dice" do you mean futz around and find out? I had a vasectomy after I divorced. I already had 3 kids, but I'd have gotten one if I didn't...resolved to bachelorhood.
 
Rakaia said:
*Face palm*
I don't think women need any more intrusion into their reproductive lives.
Click to expand...
Rakaia's statement says it all.

Mandatory DNA testing of newborns would be another attempt for men to bring women to heel. Nevermind men's involvement in pregnancy, because boys will be boys, she seduced me, that's male nature, she said she was on the pill, etc.

It's a short ride from requiring DNA paternity testing for a ll infants to burkas and mandatory chaperoning. Men need to bring women (those wanton temptresses) to heel, doncha know?

My advice to men: if you don't want to risk creating a pregnancy, keep your pants zipped or get a vasectomy.
 
Beezer said:
When I got my vasectomy, I was reading the literature before the procedure.

One of the frequently asked questions was ,"What if I get an erection during the procedure?" The Doctor answers...

"I've done over 25,000 vasectomy operations and only one patient had an erection during the procedure. It was no cause for concern."

So now I'm thinking GREAT! What if I'm only the SECOND patient out of over 25,000 men to get an erection during the operation!? :(

Anyhoo, it all worked out...just a bit of bruising for a few days and that was it.
Click to expand...
In my opinion there are much more pleasurable situations for an erection than a vasectomy :ROFLMAO:.
 
Murrmurr said:
@VaughanJB

"Well, giving birth costs money, and this would simply be another charge. Do you think true paternity matters? If there is doubt, would you be happy to roll the dice and assume fatherhood?"

True paternity matters to sons and daughters.

What would simply be another charge? The DNA testing? Single or not, would the mother be charged if it's mandatory? DNA testing to establish paternity has nothing to do with anything used or done during the infant's delivery and care, and it isn't a medical necessity, so why would anyone be charged?

Not sure what you mean by roll the dice and assume fatherhood. I've assumed fatherhood while I was doing foster care. I've been in serious relationships with women who had children and treated their children as though they were my own (but within her boundaries).

Or by "roll the dice" do you mean futz around and find out? I had a vasectomy after I divorced. I already had 3 kids, but I'd have gotten one if I didn't...resolved to bachelorhood.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter where you place the charge. Place it anywhere you want.

There is a huge difference between foster care, and ignorance. If a man found out the child was not his, he still has the option to stick as a couple, and to care for the child. It would simply ensure that those who should look after a child, does.

Do you think a child has a right to know who it's parents are? Do you think, as a husband, you have a right to know if the children are actually yours? Do you think those people that bring a life into this world should be responsible, at least in part, for the care and nurture of that child?

As I stated earlier, it's estimated 11% of births today and fathered by someone other than that on the birth certificate. That's 360,000 children a year. I think that's important. Moreso, I think it's the right of the child to know.
 
VaughanJB said:
It doesn't matter where you place the charge. Place it anywhere you want.

There is a huge difference between foster care, and ignorance. If a man found out the child was not his, he still has the option to stick as a couple, and to care for the child. It would simply ensure that those who should look after a child, does.

Do you think a child has a right to know who it's parents are? Do you think, as a husband, you have a right to know if the children are actually yours? Do you think those people that bring a life into this world should be responsible, at least in part, for the care and nurture of that child?

As I stated earlier, it's estimated 11% of births today and fathered by someone other than that on the birth certificate. That's 360,000 children a year. I think that's important. Moreso, I think it's the right of the child to know.
Click to expand...
I would contest being charged for a procedure that isn't medically necessary and that I didn't ask for.

If I wanted to know whether a child is mine or not, I would pay for a test to find out. If someone wants to know who their father is, they have to ask questions, do some research, and get a DNA kit.

The issue isn't any of that. The issue is mandatory testing on all newborns, compelling all mothers to submit to and pay for a DNA test for every child she has. What if she refuses? Would she be criminally charged? Would the court issue a warrant forcing her to submit? Would CPS get involved?

I'm against making this mandatory.
 
Murrmurr said:
I would contest being charged for a procedure that isn't medically necessary and that I didn't ask for.
Click to expand...

Easy enough to have a "opt out" checkbox, no? And again, I don't think it much matters where the charge is placed.

Murrmurr said:
If I wanted to know whether a child is mine or not, I would pay for a test to find out. If someone wants to know who their father is, they have to ask questions, do some research, and get a DNA kit.
Click to expand...

Sure, anyone can do it. The question is, should the test be mandatory so we can all know for sure.

Murrmurr said:
The issue isn't any of that. The issue is mandatory testing on all newborns, compelling all mothers to submit to and pay for a DNA test for every child she has. What if she refuses? Would she be criminally charged? Would the court issue a warrant forcing her to submit? Would CPS get involved?
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought through every eventuality. But then, as you say, not of what you're saying is really too important, since anyone can get such a test done today anyway. Honestly, if you were a newborn father and your wife was refusing such a test - what would that suggest? :D
 

Last edited:

Back
Top