Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 12-28-2011, 03:57 PM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,445,408 times
Reputation: 14692

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT View Post

...This is where you lose me and is the ENTIRE point of my argument that you quoted. I do not personally understand how a man who has loved and raised a child for many years could suddenly find out the truth about their biology and just turn around and walk away. Being a parent goes well beyond biology and if anything you are the one making the obsolete and old fashioned argument by asserting that biology is somehow greater than actual parenting.

IMO, a "man" who would turn around and walk out on his children over finding out that they weren't biologically his IS LESS OF A MAN. The children did not do anything wrong in this situation and are not deserving of the scorn and condemnation. You are taking the horrible mistake and infedility of the mother and just compounding it with rash action that only hurts the child. I understand why the marriage would end, but I do NOT understand why it should be acceptable for the father to disavow his children as if they never existed. Today I'm taking little Timmy to t-ball and teaching him how to ride his bike and he tells me, I love you daddy; then tomorrow he's dead to me, because he's actually the milkman's kid. No, I don't accept or understand that.

...
I have one dd who looks nothing like dh or I. If they called today and told me that babies had been switched at birth, I would not exchange her. I've raised her for 14years and she is my child (I have no reason to believe she's not mine she just doesn't look like us). A little strand of DNA can't change that.

I'd have really mixed feelings towards the hospital as well because I would not know and love this child if it were not for their mistake.

 
Old 12-28-2011, 09:29 PM
 
14,357 posts, read 14,173,567 times
Reputation: 45662
Quote:
Here's your problem. There are state laws that dictate parentage within marriage. Where I live, a paternity test proving a husband isn't the father wouldn't mean a damn thing because our state laws are very clear that the father of any child during a marriage is the husband of the wife, even if there is a different biological father. Marriage trumps paternity in my state, probably many other states too. When people marry, a financial partnership is formed making each partner financially responsible for whatever the other partner does and that includes having children.
This is an excellent post that pretty much sums it all up.

The concept of "marriage" has many legal implications to it. Its a concept that involves property rights, inheritance rights, obligations to pay debts, and obligations to provide financial support for other family members. Welfare and retirement systems are designed around marriage. I can be forced to pay medical bills for my wife or any of my children even if I never enter into a contractual relationship in which I formally agree to pay. Its called the "family purpose doctrine". That's just one example of obligations incurred by married people to spouses and families.

When most people think about "marriage" they are thinking of it purely as a romance novel concept. It would do everyone some good to take a course on all the legal implications involved in getting married.

As Hopes points out all this jabbering about "paternity tests" is meaningless unless one chooses to change "presumptive father statutes" (a legal presumption is created that any child born to a man's wife is his child). I don't perceive that day ever coming.

What Bruce fails to understand is that these statutes are not about fathers or mothers so much as they are about a child that needs to be supported. They also are about the taxpayers who should not have to support one more child on public assistance than is absolutely necessary. I do not perceive the day ever coming when a legislature will make a conscious decision to take away a child's right to support.

Perhaps, he should see the statute in this fashion: Imagine a father (and he is a father in every sense of the word) who supports a child financially and emotionally for 15 years. One day, Mom walks in and says "I can prove this child is not yours. I'm taking him and moving across the country and you have no rights to visitation or custody because its not your child."

Do you actually think the law could/should/or would deprive this father of his rights to visit the child that he supported all his life? Hell no. Well, that's exactly where this kind of nonsense that a few of these "father's rights" nuts is going.

If you don't trust a woman than don't marry her in the first place. Understand if you do that certain obligations will flow from that act. Don't expect us to "cry you a river" over it either.
 
Old 12-29-2011, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,445,408 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by markg91359 View Post
This is an excellent post that pretty much sums it all up.

The concept of "marriage" has many legal implications to it. Its a concept that involves property rights, inheritance rights, obligations to pay debts, and obligations to provide financial support for other family members. Welfare and retirement systems are designed around marriage. I can be forced to pay medical bills for my wife or any of my children even if I never enter into a contractual relationship in which I formally agree to pay. Its called the "family purpose doctrine". That's just one example of obligations incurred by married people to spouses and families.

When most people think about "marriage" they are thinking of it purely as a romance novel concept. It would do everyone some good to take a course on all the legal implications involved in getting married.

As Hopes points out all this jabbering about "paternity tests" is meaningless unless one chooses to change "presumptive father statutes" (a legal presumption is created that any child born to a man's wife is his child). I don't perceive that day ever coming.

What Bruce fails to understand is that these statutes are not about fathers or mothers so much as they are about a child that needs to be supported. They also are about the taxpayers who should not have to support one more child on public assistance than is absolutely necessary. I do not perceive the day ever coming when a legislature will make a conscious decision to take away a child's right to support.

Perhaps, he should see the statute in this fashion: Imagine a father (and he is a father in every sense of the word) who supports a child financially and emotionally for 15 years. One day, Mom walks in and says "I can prove this child is not yours. I'm taking him and moving across the country and you have no rights to visitation or custody because its not your child."

Do you actually think the law could/should/or would deprive this father of his rights to visit the child that he supported all his life? Hell no. Well, that's exactly where this kind of nonsense that a few of these "father's rights" nuts is going.

If you don't trust a woman than don't marry her in the first place. Understand if you do that certain obligations will flow from that act. Don't expect us to "cry you a river" over it either.
Excellent post....unfortunately, I have to spread some rep around...

I would hate to think that the day would ever come that someone could come to me, 15 years later, and say "Your child was switched at birth so we're taking the one you raised away since she's not really yours....". I'm glad that being a parent is not dependent on DNA matching.
 
Old 12-29-2011, 05:05 PM
 
Location: North America
14,204 posts, read 12,236,287 times
Reputation: 5565
Quote:
Originally Posted by (-) View Post
sometimes does not = all of the time

unfortunately this is something that a guy could never do to a woman. only a woman knows who she's slept with before her child was conceived. a guy could never hold that kind of secret.

yes, parenting is more than biology but it's unfair to hold a man to an obligation that technically is not his. i'm saying give that man the option of stepping up or moving on. he shouldn't be forced to care for a child that is not biologically his. it might also save the child the embarrassment of finding out years later when he needs a transfusion or has a medical condition that the man he/she thought was his biological father is not.

or lets say that a man and woman have been married for 10 years and has a 5 year old daughter. the man and woman have decided to separate/divorce and are going through a nasty custody battle. in a last ditch effort, she says something to the effect that your child is not your child or your child may not be your child. that's pretty much as low as you can go to hurt a man. it's not that he doesn't want to be there for the child he's helped raised all of their life but the hurt is still the hurt. at least if i've known since day 1, i'd be prepared for that.

Nothing is forcing that man from either practicing safe sex or asking for a paternity test. If he is too stupid to look out for his own welfare than who's fault is that?
 
Old 08-08-2013, 07:44 AM
 
3 posts, read 2,891 times
Reputation: 10
Smile RB-Louisiana

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bakeneko View Post
Just wondering, who would pay for this testing?
Both people involved in this Paternity testing should be held accountable to the results because it benefits both. We can not make people be responsible for anything where no proof of ownership are involvement can be proven.
Would you pay for a car you only test drove because the car salesman only said you signed papers for the vehicle. What about being charged a mortgage payment on a home you never purchased and no proof was needed by the mortgage company showing if you actually purchased the home. Only their word was suffice.
DNA testing removes any confusion about paternity and protects children from lies that will eventually hurt and devastate them later. Remove the confusion and protect the children with the truth. Both adults are involved in this process so both should be held responsible to pay for the results.
 
Old 08-08-2013, 08:28 AM
 
3 posts, read 2,891 times
Reputation: 10
Default RB-Louisiana

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucidkitty View Post
Nothing is forcing that man from either practicing safe sex or asking for a paternity test. If he is too stupid to look out for his own welfare than who's fault is that?
When has trusting someone you loved maked you stupid. Taking advantage of someone under any condition is not good. Paternity testing should really be mandated just as the child support order is mandated. Not because this helps a man or the woman but it removes all confusion from the on set.

If a parent asks for child support then thats their right under the law. The law should also take into account paternity needs to be established before all the effort and hard work to prusue a child support order. What if the man is proven not to be the father. No court dates, no garnishing of checks, no sheriffs having to pursue him, the child does not have to grow up with a lie that one day will be revealed.

In the 1940's and 50's when child support orders were really implemented, DNA testing was not what it is now. Let's remove the confusion before we start running a race that everyone loses . Money helps to support a child, good parents raise children.
.
The bible says that God is not the author of confusion but peace and a sound mind. If an adult finds out that the DNA test revealed he is not the biological father then let him choose if they want to be a part of the childs life. Don't force feed a person things they are not willing to eat.

The key is we need to remove the confusion and fog that surrounds this issue. The bible says the truth will set you free. If a biological parent is unwilling to take responsibilty for their children then this is why we have our child support laws.

Just think if you were charged a car note for a car you never bought, only because the car salesman said you owe them. What about paying a mortgage on a home you never purchased, but the mortgage company only said you owed them with no proof and the court ordered you to pay up or go to jail. Regardless how you view this that would be wrong and not the American way.

DNA testing should be paid by both parents and let them both walk in the freedom of knowing the truth not bondage based on untrues. What is wrong with knowing the truth before a lie takes root.
 
Old 08-08-2013, 08:36 AM
 
19,045 posts, read 25,142,387 times
Reputation: 13485
Quote:
Originally Posted by RB-Louisiana View Post
Both people involved in this Paternity testing should be held accountable to the results because it benefits both. We can not make people be responsible for anything where no proof of ownership are involvement can be proven.
Would you pay for a car you only test drove because the car salesman only said you signed papers for the vehicle. What about being charged a mortgage payment on a home you never purchased and no proof was needed by the mortgage company showing if you actually purchased the home. Only their word was suffice.
DNA testing removes any confusion about paternity and protects children from lies that will eventually hurt and devastate them later. Remove the confusion and protect the children with the truth. Both adults are involved in this process so both should be held responsible to pay for the results.
Then go test yourself. Don't expect to have a great following.
 
Old 08-08-2013, 08:55 AM
 
14,357 posts, read 14,173,567 times
Reputation: 45662
Quote:
When has trusting someone you loved maked you stupid. Taking advantage of someone under any condition is not good. Paternity testing should really be mandated just as the child support order is mandated. Not because this helps a man or the woman but it removes all confusion from the on set.

If a parent asks for child support then thats their right under the law. The law should also take into account paternity needs to be established before all the effort and hard work to prusue a child support order. What if the man is proven not to be the father. No court dates, no garnishing of checks, no sheriffs having to pursue him, the child does not have to grow up with a lie that one day will be revealed.

In the 1940's and 50's when child support orders were really implemented, DNA testing was not what it is now. Let's remove the confusion before we start running a race that everyone loses . Money helps to support a child, good parents raise children.
.
The bible says that God is not the author of confusion but peace and a sound mind. If an adult finds out that the DNA test revealed he is not the biological father then let him choose if they want to be a part of the childs life. Don't force feed a person things they are not willing to eat.

The key is we need to remove the confusion and fog that surrounds this issue. The bible says the truth will set you free. If a biological parent is unwilling to take responsibilty for their children then this is why we have our child support laws.

Just think if you were charged a car note for a car you never bought, only because the car salesman said you owe them. What about paying a mortgage on a home you never purchased, but the mortgage company only said you owed them with no proof and the court ordered you to pay up or go to jail. Regardless how you view this that would be wrong and not the American way.

DNA testing should be paid by both parents and let them both walk in the freedom of knowing the truth not bondage based on untrues. What is wrong with knowing the truth before a lie takes root.
No one in a marriage should be forced to have or pay for a test they don't want. If you don't trust your spouse than I suppose divorce and dissolution of the marriage is in order. Don't marry someone you don't trust.

Also, try to wrap your mind around the idea that in America family is about more than biology. The relationship between the children and adults is what is important. Not the correlation of their DNA. Our legal system protects children within this relationship and it protects the relationship itself.

I'll try not to say more. Your comments suggest you ignored most of what was written in this thread and are simply using it as an opportunity to spout your point of view while being deaf to other positions. I can't reason with someone like that.
 
Old 08-08-2013, 09:06 AM
 
3 posts, read 2,891 times
Reputation: 10
Default RB-Louisiana

Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT View Post
I don't think it should be mandatory. Sometimes people may have an intuition about something, but don't want to know the truth and just want to move on, they should not be forced to. If someone really wants to know though, that right should be made available to them before they must automatically be listed as the parent.

FWIW, parenting is more than biology. I personally couldn't see a situation where I disavowed one of my children simply because they didn't share my DNA. I truly don't unserstand the people that find out years down the line after raising a child as theirs, only to reject that child when they find out they aren't the biological father. In those cases, yes, that man should be responsible for child support.

IMO, I love technology and the advances we have made to make these kinds of things possible, but sometimes skeletons really should be left in the closet.
In Massachusetts over 30% of men paying child support are not the biological fathers of the children. If that percentage were 1%to 5% then I could possibly see where just going on with the state guidelines and trusting the mother could be argued. But over 30% is a travesity. Mandatory DNA testing especially where couples are not married in conception is needed to stop this wrong.The truth is needed if you are a good parent. Good parents have to face the truth. My mom faced the truth when I was 38 years old. To find out I had a dad that was not my step father was gratifying but somewhat confusing. Remember children who dont know where they come from will have trouble getting to where they are going. They can be successful but a lot of pain and darkness will be met on the way. Why not hold the biological parent accountable first. If another man or woman who happens to be a good person comes in and take responsibility of a child that is not theirs then praise God for them. I had to be that person in my step sons life. Lets remove all the confusion by establishing paternity, everyone is set free that way.
 
Old 08-08-2013, 09:14 AM
 
19,045 posts, read 25,142,387 times
Reputation: 13485
Quote:
Originally Posted by RB-Louisiana View Post
In Massachusetts over 30% of men paying child support are not the biological fathers of the children. If that percentage were 1%to 5% then I could possibly see where just going on with the state guidelines and trusting the mother could be argued. But over 30% is a travesity. Mandatory DNA testing especially where couples are not married in conception is needed to stop this wrong.The truth is needed if you are a good parent. Good parents have to face the truth. My mom faced the truth when I was 38 years old. To find out I had a dad that was not my step father was gratifying but somewhat confusing. Remember children who dont know where they come from will have trouble getting to where they are going. They can be successful but a lot of pain and darkness will be met on the way. Why not hold the biological parent accountable first. If another man or woman who happens to be a good person comes in and take responsibility of a child that is not theirs then praise God for them. I had to be that person in my step sons life. Lets remove all the confusion by establishing paternity, everyone is set free that way.
I challenge this lie. Where's the link?
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.


Closed Thread


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top