Should women have paternity tests forced on them

[Cheung Mo]

I would say unequivocally yes!

Children have the right to know the identity of their parents because it is directly relevant to their emotional (imagine finding when you're 12 that "daddy" isn't daddy after all) and medical (the identity of one's biological parents is directly relevant because it provides children with an accurate medical history and a knowledge of the conditions to which they may be genetically predisposed) reasons.

Furthermore, nobody should be forced to pay support for a child that is not theirs, especially when they believed in good faith that the child is theirs.

Privacy considerations are relevant here: A woman has no business hiding an affair in situations where the information is relevant to the financial, emotional, and medical well being of the child, the real father, and the supposed father. I will bend over backwards by people who I feel have been victimised by unjust laws, but if you are not willing to bare with its consequences, do not engage in ethical behaviour, legally sanctioned or not. Besides, if someone were to cheat on me, I would love to be able to ruin their life. :-P

So rather than open a can of worms years down the road, why not sort all this stuff out either during pregnancy or at birth?

[RedAnarchist]

No, because noone should have anything forced onto them, especially not something which invades a persons privacy. It sounds almost as if you want some guy to know that the baby "belongs" to him, as if it were an object.

[Cheung Mo]

But why should she have the right to hide the identity of her child's real father from the child and the alleged father? I would have a problem with it if it were only imposed on women within certain sub-groups.

I mean, the identity of one's parents is a weighty issue...You're making it sound as though this is some brainless mega-corp imposing moral hygiene on its employees by testing them for marijuana use or something equally asinine.

[Jazzratt]

No, fuck off. This is just a bunch of moralistic bullshit, if the woman wants to not mention her sexual activities then no one has the right to demand it from her. Especially not if she's decided to take this child to term. A non-biological father can operate on precisely the same level as the biological one.

As for child support - the father was perfectly happy to assume it was his when the child represented nothing more than a symbol of his virility so fuck him.

The child should, at a relatively early age, be able to request such a test however. If only to sate curiosity.

[marcocosm]

Originally posted by Cheung [email protected] 26, 2007 11:03 pm
I would say unequivocally yes!

Children have the right to know the identity of their parents because it is directly relevant to their emotional (imagine finding when you're 12 that "daddy" isn't daddy after all) and medical (the identity of one's biological parents is directly relevant because it provides children with an accurate medical history and a knowledge of the conditions to which they may be genetically predisposed) reasons.

Furthermore, nobody should be forced to pay support for a child that is not theirs, especially when they believed in good faith that the child is theirs.

Privacy considerations are relevant here: A woman has no business hiding an affair in situations where the information is relevant to the financial, emotional, and medical well being of the child, the real father, and the supposed father. I will bend over backwards by people who I feel have been victimised by unjust laws, but if you are not willing to bare with its consequences, do not engage in ethical behaviour, legally sanctioned or not. Besides, if someone were to cheat on me, I would love to be able to ruin their life. :-P

So rather than open a can of worms years down the road, why not sort all this stuff out either during pregnancy or at birth?
nooo...no FORCING of anything!!! :ph34r:

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

This problem only matters because we have the technology that allows us to determine paternity combined with an economic system that gives people a huge incentive to avoid actually coughing up money involved with the process.

The bourgeoisie don't want to pay for the upbringing of children any further than they have to, ie some degree of free schooling, inoculations etc.

So its simply more efficient to have another person pay for it, even though they might not be the biological dad.

But, saying that, nobody here will support the bourgeois state in locking up a guy who wont pay, and nobody here will talk about men who don't pay as "dead beat dads".

This problem has always been around, and only socialism solves it because the cost of up bringing are incurred collectively. So if people do have affairs then the guy is at most emotionally hurt and not financially crippled.

Anyway, people all around the world emigrate for financial reasons and there is no reason why a guy who has had fatherhood forced on him can't emigrate too. He doesnt owe the woman or the child anything, biological parent or not.

So, no, paternity testing should not be compulsory.

[Mujer Libre]

This topic belongs in OI, since instead of discussing discrimination in the sense of "disrcimination is bad, discuss" the original poster wants to enforce discipline on women's bodies and sexuality, thus reinforcing the status quo.

This is complete bullshit.

[Jazzratt]

Originally posted by Mujer [email protected] 27, 2007 01:43 am
This topic belongs in OI,
I should have thought of that!

Moved.

[SouthernBelle82]

As a woman I say no. What if the woman was raped and the father was a maniac who wanted a say in the child's life? It should always be up to the woman.

[counterblast]

I don't even understand the point of this.

You can get a paternity test on a child if you're in doubt.

It shouldn't be required.

[luxemburg89]

Firstly, this thread is rediculous and really quite offensive. As Counterblast said, it should be an option; it 'shouldn't be required'

Secondly:
Should women have paternity tests forced on them, at birth?

Makes it sound as If you want baby girls to be tested at birth to see who the father of their future baby is. It would take a lot of very well developed babies and a lot of paedophiles for your plan to even be anywhere near successful. :lol:

[Dros]

Ummm....

NO! How much more patriarchical bullshit can you fit into one sentence?

[Dean]

This seemed interesting at first, because I was expecting some kind of science -based reasoning - i.e. to insure that the babies werent switched, to be well aware of familial medical history, or whatever. But the reasons given were a joke, and Jazzrat summed up fairly nicely why.

[C_Rasmussen]

Ummmm, no........nothing should be forced on anyone really.

[Rollo]

This is the dumbest thread I have ever seen, ever. As just about everybody has said before me, nothing should ever be forced upon anybody, especially something as private as this. I still fail to see how someone can be a better father simply because they share the same genetic make up as you.


^^^ Z0mg it's rasmussen.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Children have the right to know the identity of their parents because it is directly relevant to their emotional (imagine finding when you're 12 that "daddy" isn't daddy after all)

Then in that case, if and only if the child has a burning desire to find out who their real father is, then I think they should have a right to a paternity test.


and medical (the identity of one's biological parents is directly relevant because it provides children with an accurate medical history and a knowledge of the conditions to which they may be genetically predisposed) reasons.

Surely this sort of information can be found out by examining the child's genetic material?


Furthermore, nobody should be forced to pay support for a child that is not theirs, especially when they believed in good faith that the child is theirs.

If there is doubt about a child's true parentage and paying child support is an issue, then I would support a compulsory paternity test. But for every mother that gives birth? Are you mad? It is a completely unnecessary logistical nightmare and personal intrusion.


Privacy considerations are relevant here: A woman has no business hiding an affair in situations where the information is relevant to the financial, emotional, and medical well being of the child, the real father, and the supposed father. I will bend over backwards by people who I feel have been victimised by unjust laws, but if you are not willing to bare with its consequences, do not engage in ethical behaviour, legally sanctioned or not. Besides, if someone were to cheat on me, I would love to be able to ruin their life. :-P

So rather than open a can of worms years down the road, why not sort all this stuff out either during pregnancy or at birth?

Because situations like you describe are what paternity suits are for. I see no reason to require compulsory paternity tests on every single birth when in the vast majority of cases there is no issue over a child's parentage.

Your proposal is simply a recipe for needless bureaucracy.

[pusher robot]

I think it's interesting and rather hypocritical that some of the same people who say that "nothing should be forced on anybody" have no problems forcing a father to pay child support - even, apparently, for a child that may not be his.

Please explain the inconsistency.

[Comrade Rage]

Retracted.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

pusher robot

Leftists don't support the state forcing the guy to pay for his children, whether he is the actual father or not.

We think that is bad, and much prefer all children to have their upbringing paid for by us all through public funding.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Originally posted by pusher [email protected] 28, 2007 09:19 pm
I think it's interesting and rather hypocritical that some of the same people who say that "nothing should be forced on anybody" have no problems forcing a father to pay child support - even, apparently, for a child that may not be his.

Please explain the inconsistency.
I think you're confusing leftists with liberals.

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by GeneCosta+December 28, 2007 09:28 pm--> (GeneCosta @ December 28, 2007 09:28 pm)
pusher [email protected] 28, 2007 09:19 pm
I think it's interesting and rather hypocritical that some of the same people who say that "nothing should be forced on anybody" have no problems forcing a father to pay child support - even, apparently, for a child that may not be his.

Please explain the inconsistency.
I think you're confusing leftists with liberals.[/b]

As for child support - the father was perfectly happy to assume it was his when the child represented nothing more than a symbol of his virility so fuck him.

Is Jazzrat not a leftist now?

Perhaps he should be restricted then.

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

Well Jazzrat is wrong in that case. People don't get restricted for being wrong.

Because when it comes down to it, how can leftists support the bourgeois state in forcing anyone to pay for a child. full stop.

It doesn't matter if you are a paternal father or not, since your biological relationship to the child is irrelevant, the guys choice to pay or not pay is what we support, not supporting the state.

[Publius]

Yeah, child support is bullshit.

There are numerous ways to not get pregnant, or to get out of being pregnant. To get pregnant, then do nothing about it, then not give away the kid to any of the willing people who want it and can provide for it, is absolute irresponsibility. Why should this be encouraged by forcing men to pay for a kid they (obviously) don't want?

In today's society there no reason for this type of incompetence.

It's an extortion racket.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Originally posted by Cheung [email protected] 27, 2007 01:03 am
I would say unequivocally yes!

Children have the right to know the identity of their parents because it is directly relevant to their emotional (imagine finding when you're 12 that "daddy" isn't daddy after all) and medical (the identity of one's biological parents is directly relevant because it provides children with an accurate medical history and a knowledge of the conditions to which they may be genetically predisposed) reasons.

Furthermore, nobody should be forced to pay support for a child that is not theirs, especially when they believed in good faith that the child is theirs.
First of all, as a matter of principle, no one should have any test forced on them.

Second of all, paternity tests, as the name implies, only require the testing of the father and the child (you take blood from the father and the child and you compare their genetic material to see if they are indeed related). You can't really force a paternity test on a woman even if you wanted to, because the woman has no involvement in such a test.

The question you're really asking is if "we" (who's "we," anyway? - I suppose you mean the father) should be able to force a paternity test on an underage child without the mother's consent. And the answer is no. For several reasons: It's insanely paranoid and a waste of resources in the vast majority of cases when the child's paternity is not in doubt and no child support is involved; also, it implies that the father can do things to the child without the consent of the mother, which is a very bad precedent; and worst of all, it means sticking a needle into a child for no good reason! Now, I happen to remember that I absolutely hated needles as a child, and I certainly wouldn't want one stuck into me just because my dad was paranoid.

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 02:04 am
Yeah, child support is bullshit.

There are numerous ways to not get pregnant, or to get out of being pregnant. To get pregnant, then do nothing about it, then not give away the kid to any of the willing people who want it and can provide for it, is absolute irresponsibility. Why should this be encouraged by forcing men to pay for a kid they (obviously) don't want?

In today's society there no reason for this type of incompetence.

It's an extortion racket.
Err, no. As far as I'm aware, in the vast majority of cases, the guy has to pay child support because he told the woman that he would support their child and then chickened out.

You certainly should not be required to pay child support just because you had sex with someone and they got pregnant. But if you've been going out with someone and agreed to have a child together, only to change your mind after she got pregnant, then you should be forced to honor your original promise and pay child support.

Harmful deception should be punished. Telling someone to go ahead and get pregnant because you'll support their child and trying to get out of it after the fact is harmful deception.

Of course, in a socialist society child support would be handled collectively so there would be no need for the father to pay anything, but I still think men who deceive women into having children should be punished in some way (for the same reason we would punish someone who told you it was perfectly safe to walk over a minefield).

[pusher robot]

Err, no. As far as I'm aware, in the vast majority of cases, the guy has to pay child support because he told the woman that he would support their child and then chickened out.

Well, you're wrong. In the vast majority of cases, support of the child was never discussed or even considered because the couple was too busy fucking.

The situation you describe could be handled with ordinary contract law that has been around for hundreds of years.

[Ahazmaksya]

First of all, as a matter of principle, no one should have any test forced on them.

Second of all, paternity tests, as the name implies, only require the testing of the father and the child (you take blood from the father and the child and you compare their genetic material to see if they are indeed related). You can't really force a paternity test on a woman even if you wanted to, because the woman has no involvement in such a test.

The question you're really asking is if "we" (who's "we," anyway? - I suppose you mean the father) should be able to force a paternity test on an underage child without the mother's consent. And the answer is no. For several reasons: It's insanely paranoid and a waste of resources in the vast majority of cases when the child's paternity is not in doubt and no child support is involved; also, it implies that the father can do things to the child without the consent of the mother, which is a very bad precedent; and worst of all, it means sticking a needle into a child for no good reason! Now, I happen to remember that I absolutely hated needles as a child, and I certainly wouldn't want one stuck into me just because my dad was paranoid.

You serious? I guess we shouldn't 'force' kids to have vaccinations, or force them to eat the right food, or force them to go to bed.

A needle does not hurt a child in anyway, it has no permanent negative affects. They won't even know what it's for. If a man wants to have a paternity test done, he has every right to.

[careyprice31]

Then in that case, if and only if the child has a burning desire to find out who their real father is, then I think they should have a right to a paternity test.



Surely this sort of information can be found out by examining the child's genetic material?



If there is doubt about a child's true parentage and paying child support is an issue, then I would support a compulsory paternity test. But for every mother that gives birth? Are you mad? It is a completely unnecessary logistical nightmare and personal intrusion.



Because situations like you describe are what paternity suits are for. I see no reason to require compulsory paternity tests on every single birth when in the vast majority of cases there is no issue over a child's parentage.

Your proposal is simply a recipe for needless bureaucracy.

I couldnt have written a better post than this. Can't agree more.

well said, Noxion.:)

[Cult of Reason]

The idea of testing the women for paternity, like Edric O said, is ridiculous.

That said, I think that, yes, like vaccinations children should have blood tests and genetic tests "forced" upon them, for their medical records. Presumably it will be possible in the future (now?) to recognise certain markers for genetic disease in the child. Finding out who the father is would also be useful for the medical records. As for whether, if the father is not the obvious one, the woman should be required to divulge the information, well, I do not know. I do not have sufficient medical knowledge to know if the value of the information gained outweighs the invasions of privacy.

Hopefully in Communism paternity would not be so big an issue, so getting that information would be unproblematic.

[Ahazmaksya]

A father has every right to know if a child is his. The logic seems to be "Well, if he doesn't know, it doesn't hurt him or matter. He can still provide for the child"

In that case, after a baby is born in hospital lets just keep them all unmarked, together and give them out to random mums. After all it doesn't matter who the biological parents are.

Both parents have the right to know who is their child, simple as that.

[Zurdito]

But why should she have the right to hide the identity of her child's real father from the child and the alleged father? I would have a problem with it if it were only imposed on women within certain sub-groups.

I mean, the identity of one's parents is a weighty issue...You're making it sound as though this is some brainless mega-corp imposing moral hygiene on its employees by testing them for marijuana use or something equally asinine.

what if she had an affair and wanted to keep it a secret? why shouldn't she be able to? what if by forcing her to take a test you exposed her to punishment from a patriarchal society for her "adultery"?

[Joby]

Why would the woman need to take a Paternity test? Isn't it obvious that she is, indeed, the mother?

The man has every right to make sure that the baby is, indeed, his. If it is not, then he should have no obligation to either the child or the mother. If he is, however, he should be made responsible in some way for that action -- Unless he pushed for an abortion and she refused, of course :lol:

[Joby]

what if she had an affair and wanted to keep it a secret? why shouldn't she be able to? what if by forcing her to take a test you exposed her to punishment from a patriarchal society for her "adultery"?

Because, in a scenario were a test would be sought, someone is most likely going out and working to provide for that baby. If it is not that person's, they should be informed of that and they should be made aware that their labor/time/money isn't going towards what they thought it was. Whether or not they choose to demand a test, or continue providing once they know it isn't their's, should be their choice.

[careyprice31]

A father has every right to know if a child is his. The logic seems to be "Well, if he doesn't know, it doesn't hurt him or matter. He can still provide for the child"

In that case, after a baby is born in hospital lets just keep them all unmarked, together and give them out to random mums. After all it doesn't matter who the biological parents are.

Both parents have the right to know who is their child, simple as that.

well obviously I would know if a baby is mine or not being female

:laugh:

but if I were a male, I do think i would want to know that I had a son or daughter.

But i dont believe in force. I probably would try to ask the mother would she let the child and me be tested for a match. I wouldn't wanna force her to take the test.

and wouldn't wanna expose her to any shame from a patriarchal society or anything. I'd aagree to keep it a secret. I would like to know if I was the father though if I was a male.

[pusher robot]

well obviously I would know if a baby is mine or not being female

:laugh:

but if I were a male, I do think i would want to know that I had a son or daughter.

But i dont believe in force. I probably would try to ask the mother would she let the child and me be tested for a match. I wouldn't wanna force her to take the test.

and wouldn't wanna expose her to any shame from a patriarchal society or anything. I'd aagree to keep it a secret. I would like to know if I was the father though if I was a male.

The mother doesn't have to do anything for a paternity test. The OP was wrong. So nothing would be forced on the mother. The only person being imposed upon would be the child, and as to the poster who said:

it implies that the father can do things to the child without the consent of the mother, which is a very bad precedentThat's horseshit, unless you also believe that the mother being able to do things to the child without the consent of the father is equally bad. How does the mother have the power over the father to decide what the child will be allowed/required to do? Aren't we in favor of equal rights?

[Ahazmaksya]

well obviously I would know if a baby is mine or not being female

:laugh:

but if I were a male, I do think i would want to know that I had a son or daughter.

But i dont believe in force. I probably would try to ask the mother would she let the child and me be tested for a match. I wouldn't wanna force her to take the test.

and wouldn't wanna expose her to any shame from a patriarchal society or anything. I'd aagree to keep it a secret. I would like to know if I was the father though if I was a male.

You would know initially. I've never seen a baby be born but I assume after all is said and done the kid is taken from the mum to a ward of some kind, monitored and then released. According to the logic on here it doesn't matter who a kids biological parents are. So the wrong baby going home with a couple is of no consequence?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=500386&in_page_id=1811

The mother is this story is on suicide watch (I believe that's what's inferred) after taking home the wrong baby and looking after it for 6 months. They don't know where to find her real child. She is distraught, and fair enough!

But apparently a father doesn't have the right to know if the child is HIS? Bullshit. Nothing is forced on the mum. Only the child, who would have a bit of blood taken, never remember it and have no negative affects from it.

My argument is appealing to emotion but childbirth is an emotional subject. If you all say in a perfect world biological ties would mean nothing, fine. But you are deluding yourselves. I'd expect each of the mums and dads in here to be willing to give up their own child and take another one home (at birth). No bond is formed at this stage (apparently) so it shouldn't matter. Right?

[careyprice31]

You would know initially. I've never seen a baby be born but I assume after all is said and done the kid is taken from the mum My argument is appealing to emotion but childbirth is an emotional subject. If you all say in a perfect world biological ties would mean nothing, fine. But you are deluding yourselves. I'd expect each of the mums and dads in here to be willing to give up their own child and take another one home (at birth). No bond is formed at this stage (apparently) so it shouldn't matter. Right?

anyone who knows science knows that there is a bond between parents and offspring. Absolutely. Which is why adoption can be extremely a painful choice too (despite what pro life nut bars will tell you)

Dont believe there is a bond between parents and child? watch a human mom with her baby, or a mother cat with her kittens. The bond is there, whether the mom is a human or an animal.

So, yes, I do not see why a father should be kept ignorant of what he may wish to know, if he has a son or daughter. If he wants to know, I dont see why not. And it may help the child too, when he/she grows, up, he'll/she'll know and may even appreciate not being lied to.

But I dont believe people should be forced to take the test. Of course a baby cant decide to take a test or not, someone else must decide for a baby.

[Ahazmaksya]

anyone who knows science knows that there is a bond between parents and offspring. Absolutely. Which is why adoption can be extremely a painful choice too (despite what pro life nut bars will tell you)

Dont believe there is a bond between parents and child? watch a human mom with her baby, or a mother cat with her kittens. The bond is there, whether the mom is a human or an animal.

So, yes, I do not see why a father should be kept ignorant of what he may wish to know, if he has a son or daughter. If he wants to know, I dont see why not. And it may help the child too, when he/she grows, up, he'll/she'll know and may even appreciate not being lied to.

But I dont believe people should be forced to take the test. Of course a baby cant decide to take a test or not, someone else must decide for a baby.

Completely agree. And I too don't believe anything which can have a DIRECT negative/permanent affect on a child should not be allowed (such as circumcision).

But having a needle, I have no problem 'forcing' that on a child. No different to 'forcing' a child to eat food he/she doesn't like in my opinion.

[Orange Juche]

Nobody should be forced, but if the man is going to have to pay child support, he should have the option of a paternity test before having to do so.