Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Child support laws are horribly one-sided. For example, if a woman has a kid and hides the child's birth from the father, but later files for support, the man can be made to pay support dating back to the child's birth. How is that fair if the man never knew he had a child in the first place? Similarly, if a man supports a child thinking it is his, but the mother lied about the child's paternity, shouldn't he be entitled to recoup the money he'd be defrauded out of? So long as the laws allow the biological father to pay back child support then the non-biologically related man should be reimbursed while the mother files for support from the bio-dad, correct?
Seems reasonable to me. And maybe the laws are one sided, but we have too many single moms either working multiple jobs to pay for their children or collecting assistance to pay for their children.
I know of one person personally and there is no doubt of paternity. But he refuses to pay child support and would prefer his child just not be in his life. Sad mostly for the child.
You say "submit" like it's a big procedure. It is is a cotton swab on the inside of the cheek for a few seconds. Not to mention the woman would not need to be tested at all.
Submit is just a word.
Submit: to present for the approval, consideration, or decision of another or others: to submit a plan; to submit an application.
It isnt the physical collecting of our body fluids/cell etc.
but the other definition of submit that some have a problem with:
to give over or yield to the power or authority of another (often used reflexively).
Some dont like the invasion of privacy or the fact that our genetic material is out there in the hands of the government and strangers.
Once that little swab is taken, it must be sent to a lab and processed, results established, read and sent somewhere to be entered and stored. All this costs money. Money is another concern.
If you are going to test the baby and the "father" if there is one present at the time, why not also a mandatory test the mother. All this concern about making sure the baby is matched with the father, no one cares if the baby goes home with the correct mother?
Seems reasonable to me. And maybe the laws are one sided, but we have too many single moms either working multiple jobs to pay for their children or collecting assistance to pay for their children.
I know of one person personally and there is no doubt of paternity. But he refuses to pay child support and would prefer his child just not be in his life. Sad mostly for the child.
Strangely enough, not too many people feel that way about abortion
Strangely enough, not too many people feel that way about abortion
Yeah, and strangely enough, there are those who care only about a child who has yet to be born and would like to cut off benefits like WIC, KidsCare, etc once the child is born.
Yeah, and strangely enough, there are those who care only about a child who has yet to be born and would like to cut off benefits like WIC, KidsCare, etc once the child is born.
How else are they going to get the money to pay for all the unnecessary mandatory paternity test?
I agree with what you're saying, but the idea does come off as some back alley way to establish a data base of everyone's DNA. ANd I can understand why quite a few people would be against it for just that reason.
Companies sell and trade clumps of our personal information all the time. I don't see what would stop hosptials or the federal government from doing so.
A simple way to fix this is to require women to name all the men who may be the child's father, and the state subpoena them for paternity testing as normal as though they were being sought for child support. This protects the state and child in one go and they can name more than one man if necessary. However, the second half to eliminating paternity fraud is to require disclosure by women when they become pregnant. They should be required to notify all men who may be the father that she's pregnant, thus protecting those men's parental rights. Furthermore, if multiple men may be the father, she must also include in the disclosure this fact of questionable paternity. Any genetic testing required should be done by a 3rd party and the material destroyed once results are issued. No state handling of DNA whatsoever, just a positive/negative report issued by the testing authority.
Combining the two methods together means that if a woman files for child support and the test comes back negative, and the women didn't notify the man she named that he might not be the father, that's perjury and she gets charged with attempted paternity fraud. Yes, that's right, I'd like to see this fraud specifically made into a crime. It already is in a way, but it's rarely ever enforced. Usually you only hear about it when a man commits paternity fraud by falsifying the genetic sample to weasel out of child support.
Based on the very conservative 2% figure paternity fraud apologists like to use, using the 2009 figures from wikipedia there are approximately 61,944,831 children in the US aged 14 and under. At "just" 2% that means there's 1,238,896 children (under 18 will be a good deal higher), plus these kids' fathers, are being victimized by paternity fraud just in the United States alone! And even in the studies I've seen citing 2%, that's not true for all demographics. In some the figures skyrocket as high as 33%!!! In cases when paternity is questioned for whatever reason, a full 1/3rd of results comes back negative.
I'm for many fathers rights arguments, but mandatory paternity testing is not necessary. Hospitals offering the test to the man privately is a good solution. Otherwise, men can speak up for ourselves when discussing this topic with women. I have my own personal mandatory paternity testing policy. I tell every woman I've dated early in the relationship that if we ever had a child, I'd automatically test him/her before signing any birth certificate. To this day, no woman has complained about my plans.
Here are solutions for instances where men forget, or is to afraid to disclose to women: Make paternity fraud a felony against the mother. I'm for lawsuits to recover past child support paid by a non-bio father from the actual bio father. I'm also for male "financial abortion" to equalize gender rights to unilaterally opt-out of parenthood before the abortion max trimester limit.
However, I don't want a government mandate that put everyone's DNA on the line. It takes one law and our DNA is in some government database for our "protection" or to "help catch rapists and criminals".
There's no reason for a woman to be upset if you told her your plans to test every child early in the relationship and frame it as a personal philosophy based on "peace of mind" that has nothing to do with her as a person. She can't say you don't trust her since the relationship is still in the "getting to know you" stage and pregnancy is not in the immediate future. He can even compare it to maternity testing many hospitals perform to prevent "baby switching" and give the mother "peace of mind". A man testing his child does not infringe on the mother in any way, since the test is between father and child only.
If any woman complains about a man's early disclosure that he'll test every child, he needs to evaluate the woman he's dating because she's either not trustworthy, or has a negative mentality that will poison the relationship in other areas.
Last edited by Freedom123; 02-16-2011 at 10:10 AM..
A simple way to fix this is to require women to name all the men who may be the child's father, and the state subpoena them for paternity testing as normal as though they were being sought for child support. This protects the state and child in one go and they can name more than one man if necessary. However, the second half to eliminating paternity fraud is to require disclosure by women when they become pregnant. They should be required to notify all men who may be the father that she's pregnant, thus protecting those men's parental rights. Furthermore, if multiple men may be the father, she must also include in the disclosure this fact of questionable paternity. Any genetic testing required should be done by a 3rd party and the material destroyed once results are issued. No state handling of DNA whatsoever, just a positive/negative report issued by the testing authority.
Combining the two methods together means that if a woman files for child support and the test comes back negative, and the women didn't notify the man she named that he might not be the father, that's perjury and she gets charged with attempted paternity fraud. Yes, that's right, I'd like to see this fraud specifically made into a crime. It already is in a way, but it's rarely ever enforced. Usually you only hear about it when a man commits paternity fraud by falsifying the genetic sample to weasel out of child support.
Based on the very conservative 2% figure paternity fraud apologists like to use, using the 2009 figures from wikipedia there are approximately 61,944,831 children in the US aged 14 and under. At "just" 2% that means there's 1,238,896 children (under 18 will be a good deal higher), plus these kids' fathers, are being victimized by paternity fraud just in the United States alone! And even in the studies I've seen citing 2%, that's not true for all demographics. In some the figures skyrocket as high as 33%!!! In cases when paternity is questioned for whatever reason, a full 1/3rd of results comes back negative.
I hope you realize that what you propose is not practical and could never be enforced.
First it is an envasion of privacy. You can not force anyone to devulge their sexual partners nor is it always possible to locate past partners and it would be an extreme burden (physically and financially) on law enforcement/courts to write subponeas and track down all these people.
Second, who is going to enforce this reporting of possible "fathers", the OBGYN or are you going to require a police officer stationed in every clinic, health department and private office to interrogate patients.
These things will lead to not only possibly destroying the lives/families of men named, but discouraging women to seek prenatal care.
Concerning the 2% you quoted, can you provide a link to ACTUAL DATA. Ive seen multiple websites stating anywhere from 2 to over 30%, but no studies or data to back anything up. Nor did it state anywhere if the percentage consisted of paternity cases filed or actual results or if these cases were filed based on child support cases or other reasons or who initiated the cases.
I hope you realize that what you propose is not practical and could never be enforced.
First it is an envasion of privacy. You can not force anyone to devulge their sexual partners nor is it always possible to locate past partners and it would be an extreme burden (physically and financially) on law enforcement/courts to write subponeas and track down all these people.
Second, who is going to enforce this reporting of possible "fathers", the OBGYN or are you going to require a police officer stationed in every clinic, health department and private office to interrogate patients.
These things will lead to not only possibly destroying the lives/families of men named, but discouraging women to seek prenatal care.
Concerning the 2% you quoted, can you provide a link to ACTUAL DATA. Ive seen multiple websites stating anywhere from 2 to over 30%, but no studies or data to back anything up. Nor did it state anywhere if the percentage consisted of paternity cases filed or actual results or if these cases were filed based on child support cases or other reasons or who initiated the cases.
I'm for Nutz76's cause, but his solution is overkill. Offering the test privately to each father at the hospital, penalties for fraudulent mothers, back pay to non-biological fathers by bio-fathers, and male financial abortion will solve the problem without the blanket tests, disclosures, and subpoenas. If anything, my solution encourages the mother to identify the correct father since it's virtually impossible to pin a child on the wrong man (innocently or deliberately).
In regards to destroying lives, I'm assuming you're referring to married/attached men the mother slept with. Why is it important to protect the lives of someone doing wrong? Is this not hurting people affected by their wrongdoings? I'm asking philosophically, since that path isn't necessary with my solution.
I'm for Nutz76's cause, but his solution is overkill. Offering the test privately to each father at the hospital, penalties for fraudulent mothers, back pay to non-biological fathers by bio-fathers, and male financial abortion will solve the problem without the blanket tests, disclosures, and subpoenas. If anything, my solution encourages the mother to identify the correct father since it's virtually impossible to pin a child on the wrong man (innocently or deliberately).
In regards to destroying lives, I'm assuming you're referring to married/attached men the mother slept with. Why is it important to protect the lives of someone doing wrong? Is this not hurting people affected by their wrongdoings? I'm asking philosophically, since that path isn't necessary with my solution.
I agree with you. Men need to have legal protection/recourse but provided on an individual basis when there is doubt or a need . Testing is available, a signature on a bc is required, etc. etc. The place I see falling short is with the court and courts are not always fair under any circumstance.
As far as destroying lives, sending a court supbonea to every man "fingered" could destroy the life of innocent men. Indeed if the man were married or in a relationship or had never even slept with the woman. If a woman is devious enough to knowingly falsify paternity what would prevent her form naming half of dozen random men. Once accused, the doubt remains. Just the accusation could cause divorce which in turn affects the wife and any children. If the man were served at work it could also affect his job, innocent or guilty.
Other situations if it were mandatory (even if the mother were not seeking cs or any assistance) would be one or both parties dont want the father in the childs life for whatever reason.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
