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.
Well to be fair, collecting DNA for the purpose of identifying paternity vs. identifying genetic disorders isn't quite the same thing.
Hospitals don't routinely do drug testing for every woman giving birth so I'm not sure how it relates to this.
I think his/her response was in regards to this:
Quote:
Medical personnel are involved in our personal medical conditions, not our private lives. Our medical records are protected and their is a reason for that. If a drug were to show up in my system when I go for a routine check up, the nurse or lab tech does not get involved by informing...law enforcement.
After reading more of these posts, I say let's not even bother putting identification tags on newborns. A baby is a baby so who cares which one you get? So long as the mother gave birth to a live baby she should leave with one. The only purpose for the id tags is to prove that a particular baby came from a particular woman's birth canal. A real woman wouldn't care which baby she gave birth to as long as she leaves the hospital with one. We wouldn't want these babies to feel bad because of some silly woman's preference to have a baby with her DNA.
My argument for testing? I think that it is beneficial for a child to know who their biological father is for personal health history reasons, which would just be one of the benefits of knowing. Beyond that, I think it's only fair for a man to be 100% sure that the child is his if he's going to take on the responsibility. Then there's the matter of the biological father, if not the husband, having the right to know he has a child and being held responsible.
So if paternity testing is desirable so that the child can know who is biological father is, where would we stop with that?
Say a kid is adopted. He does a little detective work and is led to believe his father could be one of several individuals in a small town. Can he mandate these individuals to take a paternity test?
But this is precisely what mandatory testing would eliminate. No man would find out years later, he would find out at time of birth.
But he already can. All he has to do is have his kids paternity tested. It's always been personal choice to have that done. Nobody is saying you can't...it just doesn't need to be mandatory at the expense of the insurance companies and tax payers. Those that are in doubt or want that piece of mind can pay for it privately.
After reading more of these posts, I say let's not even bother putting identification tags on newborns. A baby is a baby so who cares which one you get? So long as the mother gave birth to a live baby she should leave with one. The only purpose for the id tags is to prove that a particular baby came from a particular woman's birth canal. A real woman wouldn't care which baby she gave birth to as long as she leaves the hospital with one. We wouldn't want these babies to feel bad because of some silly woman's preference to have a baby with her DNA.
This is a real stretch.
Every step should be taken to ensure that a baby goes home with the correct parents, but finding out there was an error 13+ years later is a completely different scenario. In that case the courts would decide what is in the best interest of the child. Sometimes it's not in the best interest of the child to remove them from the only family they have ever known.
After reading more of these posts, I say let's not even bother putting identification tags on newborns. A baby is a baby so who cares which one you get? So long as the mother gave birth to a live baby she should leave with one. The only purpose for the id tags is to prove that a particular baby came from a particular woman's birth canal. A real woman wouldn't care which baby she gave birth to as long as she leaves the hospital with one. We wouldn't want these babies to feel bad because of some silly woman's preference to have a baby with her DNA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Sixy*
This is a real stretch.
Every step should be taken to ensure that a baby goes home with the correct parents, but finding out there was an error 13+ years later is a completely different scenario. In that case the courts would decide what is in the best interest of the child. Sometimes it's not in the best interest of the child to remove them from the only family they have ever known.
What you really mean is the correct mother. But why? If DNA doesn't matter what difference does it make if mom takes home some other woman's baby? The only thing tagging babies is supposed to prove is that the child leaves with the correct mother. But if we say leaving with the correct father is irrelevant, why isn't it the same for the mom? The baby will be loved regardless, won't it?
What you really mean is the correct mother. But why? If DNA doesn't matter what difference does it make if mom takes home some other woman's baby? The only thing tagging babies is supposed to prove is that the child leaves with the correct mother. But if we say leaving with the correct father is irrelevant, why isn't it the same for the mom? The baby will be loved regardless, won't it?
Please quote me where I state that DNA doesn't matter? No, here...let me quote myself for you and save you the trouble:
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Sixy*
If I had raised that child over the last 13+ years I wouldn't even consider a paternity test.
Quote:
Originally Posted by *Sixy*
Excuse me, I stand corrected...DNA testing.
And I wouldn't really know that child, so it's really not my child...it's just my biology. I'm sure I'd want to meet the child but they would be better off with the people that raised him/her. I wouldn't tear a child away from the only family they knew just because they had my genes unless it was in the best interest of that child. But I guess we know where you stand.
I would fight tooth and nail to keep the children I have raised for the last 13 years.
I never said it wouldn't matter. I was referring to a child that had been raised in a household for 13+ years with a family, which is MUCH different than taking a newborn home from the hospital. I would hope most people could comprehend the difference in those two situations and the impact of taking a child from the only family they knew during their formative years.
Likewise, fighting for the rights to a 13+yr old child that I don't know simply because I share biology with him/her would be selfish in my opinion. If there is nothing wrong with their homelife, they likely would be better off staying with the family they were raised with.
Of course, this is only my opinion. You are free to disagree but please don't put words in my mouth by applying my opinion to a completely different situation.
There are no winners here, as everybody has said ad nauseam.
At the same time, I'm not sure I'm so ready to depict this guy as the victim. Yes, his wife cheated on him. Yes, his wife deceived him. Yes, he paid out a ton in child support payments. I feel nothing but compassion for this poor slob on all these points.
But if he gave one whit about these kids, if he cared in the least about them despite not being their biological father, then he would not have filed a lawsuit. He would not have dragged them into a courtroom. He would not have splashed their names all over the newspapers.
For now these children not only have to live with the legacy of their mother being an amoral youknowwhat, but they also have to deal with everybody else on the planet knowing it, too. The embarrassment of that alone must be traumatic for them.
And, really, what has this guy proved? By the time he pays his legal fees, not much of that money will be left over. So he will have put these children through all this...for what?
My children are all clones of me. No doubt whose they are. But if I had made a discovery like this after the fact, I think I would have simply let sleeping dogs lie when it came to informing them.
There are no winners here, as everybody has said ad nauseam.
At the same time, I'm not sure I'm so ready to depict this guy as the victim. Yes, his wife cheated on him. Yes, his wife deceived him. Yes, he paid out a ton in child support payments. I feel nothing but compassion for this poor slob on all these points.
But if he gave one whit about these kids, if he cared in the least about them despite not being their biological father, then he would not have filed a lawsuit. He would not have dragged them into a courtroom. He would not have splashed their names all over the newspapers.
For now these children not only have to live with the legacy of their mother being an amoral youknowwhat, but they also have to deal with everybody else on the planet knowing it, too. The embarrassment of that alone must be traumatic for them.
And, really, what has this guy proved? By the time he pays his legal fees, not much of that money will be left over. So he will have put these children through all this...for what?
My children are all clones of me. No doubt whose they are. But if I had made a discovery like this after the fact, I think I would have simply let sleeping dogs lie when it came to informing them.
So you're going to award the mom for what she did single-handedly to this family.
IMO this is what it's about here, to punish HER not the kids but probably the mom injected her bad words about him and has accomplished severing ties between him and the kids and this after all the time, love and financial support he gave these kids.
If more men who fathered children not biologically his own found out AFTER THE FACT and are no longer together with the ex-wife did what this man did maybe more women would think twice before trying to deceive any man to become a father to someone else's kid(s). Lies shouldn't happen in the first place and men do not always have "x-ray" knowledge of otherwise when a woman says the children are his when they are not.
The kids here who I do feel badly for can look up to their mom to one who has also deceived them all of these years. Just a bad story all around.
A lie is a lie is a lie.
When a man does wrong he's by most women and depending on the action rightly so.
Time for some women to take accountability and pay "the price" like most men have done for a long long time.
There are no winners here, as everybody has said ad nauseam.
At the same time, I'm not sure I'm so ready to depict this guy as the victim. Yes, his wife cheated on him. Yes, his wife deceived him. Yes, he paid out a ton in child support payments. I feel nothing but compassion for this poor slob on all these points.
But if he gave one whit about these kids, if he cared in the least about them despite not being their biological father, then he would not have filed a lawsuit. He would not have dragged them into a courtroom. He would not have splashed their names all over the newspapers.
For now these children not only have to live with the legacy of their mother being an amoral youknowwhat, but they also have to deal with everybody else on the planet knowing it, too. The embarrassment of that alone must be traumatic for them.
And, really, what has this guy proved? By the time he pays his legal fees, not much of that money will be left over. So he will have put these children through all this...for what?
My children are all clones of me. No doubt whose they are. But if I had made a discovery like this after the fact, I think I would have simply let sleeping dogs lie when it came to informing them.
Exactly.
The thing Im not understanding about his actions and maybe because Im not familiar with how UK courts deal with these situations but on face value he did not sue to recover child support he paid because he found out he was not the biological father. He sued for bereavement compensation because he claimed that the ex kept him from having a relationship with his children and worked to turn them against him which IMO is the same as suing for parental alimentation here in the US. No establishment of paternity is necessary in this situation so why would he need to have a paternity test. It would actually probably work against him in such a situation. Ironically it seems it was the paternity aspect that actually drove a big wedge between him and his children.
Perhaps in the UK as in the US it makes no difference in paying CS if you are not the biological father if you have raised the children as your own so he was actually intentionally suing for the CS he had paid the past 4 years but that would not fly in court so he wrapped it in a different package.
It irks me that that he is whining about being alienated from his children and would love to be in their lives at the same time going on about how he basically is no longer a father and its too late to have children. He fails to consider that it was his decision to put the kids thru a law suit by paternity testing weather it was to either get his CS back and punish his ex or because he actually felt deprived of a relationship and wanted to punish his ex that actually destroyed his parental relationship with the kids.
Personally, I think it was all about the money and revenge so he should shut up already about being a father.
I hope something good comes of this case like setting precedence to stop parents from alienating children against the other parent or preventing a healthy relationship.
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.
by most women and depending on the action rightly so.