Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Relationships
 [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)
 
Old 04-10-2010, 05:20 AM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,424,366 times
Reputation: 14692

Advertisements

On a serious note, all mandatory DNA testing would accomplish is a bunch of kids with no fathers and, most likely they would not be kids from the best walks of life. If the objective were to make sure the real father stepped up to the plate, maybe you could make an argument for mandatory testing if the parents aren't married or something but then you'd have to keep testing until you found the real father or leave a child without support.

Personally, I think naming the wrong father is the lesser of the evils. Sorry guys, but if you're having sex with her, you are taking risks. Moral of the story, don't sleep with women you can't trust.

And DNA testing isn't 100%. What will you do with the false negatives? Just tell them tough chit? While chimerism is rare, it's possible for a person to have two sets of DNA (If you get a chance, watch the program "I am my own twin".) and to test out as not being the parent to their own children. This happened to a woman who nearly had her kids taken away. Fortunately, she was pregnant with her third child at the time maternity came in question and the state had someone in the delivery room to take samples and do the test. Given a standard DNA test, her kids test out as not hers but they are hers.

There was another case in europe when children went in to be tested as possible living donors for their mom only to find that two out of three of the children don't test as hers. There are also mistakes made in the lab.

Bottom line: If you suspect your SO cheated on you, then make sure the child is yours. Just don't be surprised if she dumps you if she wasn't. It's your choice to make and your risk to take either way.

Last edited by Ivorytickler; 04-10-2010 at 05:36 AM..

 
Old 04-10-2010, 05:30 AM
 
Location: Homeless
1,203 posts, read 1,977,500 times
Reputation: 516
The DNA saved my life. Or at leas 18 years of effort and money.
My ex cheated on me and I got the marriage anulled after eight months.
i was 20 at the time and fresh out of college. She was 27.
She never told me she was pregnant. She just had the kid and I got court papers.
When they offered paternity testing I was first in line.
It said 99.99% probability that I was not the father.
I actually invited all my friends over and threw a party.

And two weeks later I got sterilized.
Had to go to several docs because of my age.
The fifth one I told my story too and he hooked me up.

Dodged that bullet.
 
Old 04-10-2010, 05:35 AM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,424,366 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by nichirenx View Post
The DNA saved my life. Or at leas 18 years of effort and money.
My ex cheated on me and I got the marriage anulled after eight months.
i was 20 at the time and fresh out of college. She was 27.
She never told me she was pregnant. She just had the kid and I got court papers.
When they offered paternity testing I was first in line.
It said 99.99% probability that I was not the father.
I actually invited all my friends over and threw a party.

And two weeks later I got sterilized.
Had to go to several docs because of my age.
The fifth one I told my story too and he hooked me up.

Dodged that bullet.
In a case like yours, I would have the test. What we're talking about here is making it mandatory in all cases. There is a huge difference between an ex serving you with papers and someone you've been married to and made a family and home with having a baby with you by her side. There was no trust violated or relationship to risk in your case. When someone pops up out of your past and says "You're the dad", you have the right to question. If it's someone you've been in a long term relationship with, the issue of distrust is bigger than the paternity issue and you will, likely, destroy the relationship to prove a point.
 
Old 04-10-2010, 05:35 AM
 
Location: Homeless
1,203 posts, read 1,977,500 times
Reputation: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2mares View Post
Actually I believe in the majority of cases the women that have had affairs arent sure of the paternity and probably dont really want to know.

I think its really just a matter of you guys can do it to us "confirmation" but we cant do it to you. If DNA testing were mandatory, then a database should be put in place listing the names of the men matching the DNA of every child born, like a sexual preadtor database, so wives could go on line once every 9 months to make sure their husbands havent fathered any other children.
Now wouldnt that be a mess.
It would actually be fair.
That way if the man has any kids he would be held responsible.
 
Old 04-10-2010, 05:38 AM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,424,366 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by nichirenx View Post
It would actually be fair.
That way if the man has any kids he would be held responsible.
And what is the cost to benefit ratio of this massive an undertaking?
 
Old 04-10-2010, 05:45 AM
 
Location: Homeless
1,203 posts, read 1,977,500 times
Reputation: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
And what is the cost to benefit ratio of this massive an undertaking?
If they are going to mandate DNA anyway then not much more than the original idea. Because all the collected samples will be put into the database.
You can automate the cross referencing program.
And since the courts take part of the child support anyway, they can work out the budget.
 
Old 04-10-2010, 05:47 AM
 
Location: Homeless
1,203 posts, read 1,977,500 times
Reputation: 516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
In a case like yours, I would have the test. What we're talking about here is making it mandatory in all cases. There is a huge difference between an ex serving you with papers and someone you've been married to and made a family and home with having a baby with you by her side. There was no trust violated or relationship to risk in your case. When someone pops up out of your past and says "You're the dad", you have the right to question. If it's someone you've been in a long term relationship with, the issue of distrust is bigger than the paternity issue and you will, likely, destroy the relationship to prove a point.
I concur.
And my cousin found out his youngest three children by his wife of 15 years were not his.
The next to last had some kind of strange genetic disorder.
And they tested him and his wife.
And thats how he found out.
Once this was done, he got all the kids tested.

Then again had she not cheated I would have probably had it done anyway.
Because I know women in my family who have done that to guys.

I saw what one poster earlier said about gps tracking and all that.
My thing is this, I would not in any way try to snoop on the woman I am with.

But when it comes to a lifetime of time, effort, and expense, I have to know.
 
Old 04-10-2010, 05:52 AM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,424,366 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by nichirenx View Post
If they are going to mandate DNA anyway then not much more than the original idea. Because all the collected samples will be put into the database.
You can automate the cross referencing program.
And since the courts take part of the child support anyway, they can work out the budget.
This is a massive undertaking on the part of society to spare a few individuals. It would be cheaper to buy "I'm not the dad" insurance just in case you get stuck paying for child support for a child that isn't, biologically, yours. Or better yet, don't sleep with untrustworthy women. Sex is optional.
 
Old 04-10-2010, 05:54 AM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,424,366 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by nichirenx View Post
I concur.
And my cousin found out his youngest three children by his wife of 15 years were not his.
The next to last had some kind of strange genetic disorder.
And they tested him and his wife.
And thats how he found out.
Once this was done, he got all the kids tested.

Then again had she not cheated I would have probably had it done anyway.
Because I know women in my family who have done that to guys.

I saw what one poster earlier said about gps tracking and all that.
My thing is this, I would not in any way try to snoop on the woman I am with.

But when it comes to a lifetime of time, effort, and expense, I have to know.
Interesting that none of the kids were his. In a case like that, I'd want to make sure the dad has only one set of DNA. You'd think, statistically speaking, that one of them would have been his if he'd been sleeping with her without protection.

Since you're fixed it's not an issue for you but I would suggest that men who are going to demand DNA testing put that in a pre-nup so she's aware of the fact she's entering a union with a man who does not and never will trust her. For me, trust is so huge I would have chosen to not marry him if my husband had done this. I see no reason to even be in a relationship with someone who doesn't trust me when I haven't given him reason to not trust me. Guilt by association, becuase I happen to be female and some women cheat is, IMO, nonsense.

I can tell you that my husband would have turned himself into a weekend father had he demanded DNA testing. I would have moved on to someone who did trust me. He'd get the kids every other weekend.

I really don't get why guys are sleeping with women they can't trust. If you can't trust her, keep it in your pants. It really is that simple.
 
Old 04-10-2010, 06:26 AM
 
2,949 posts, read 2,886,107 times
Reputation: 5028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post

I can tell you that my husband would have turned himself into a weekend father had he demanded DNA testing.
Maybe a weekend mother? The supporting reasoning holds up real well in court.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
I would have moved on to someone who did trust me.
Yeah, just that simple. We all know single moms are prime real estate on the dating market

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
He'd get the kids every other weekend.
Wow...you have this all planned out. I just saw my bud through his divorce and the woman thought she had it all planned out with collecting big checks for their two kids, alimony, the works. What a kick in the jaw she got with no kids and her paying. Why I love this state. You bring the simple notion of "lack of trust" to court and the judge will die laughing Self incrimination as a wack job is the best defense Already saw it...
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 > Relationships

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