Are Paternity Tests Insulting?

[Woggle]

Yeah, I got my check. $17.55 for the last two months - oh boy do I have him over a barrel! Look at him be a daddy!

 

So every father is like your ex?

[Mr White]

The only reason I brought up that scenario was exactly to point out what a gross and offensive generalization it was. Can you not see that claiming all men are potential rapists is a flip side to claiming ALL women are potentially cheating on their husbands and forcing their husbands through ongoing gross deception to raise a child not biologically theirs? Is that not a gross and offensive generalization? Yes, some women have done that, it is a sad and terrible thing with negative repercussions. Some men are also rapists, also a sad and terrible thing with very negative repercussions.

 

Not all, but about 4-5%. Which is pretty risky. in 1 out of 25 marriages the husband is not the biological father of the kid

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2005/aug/11/childrensservices.uknews

 

So, depending on other mediating variables, the odds may be considered bad enough to justify routine paternity testing.

[Stung]

I am particularly sick of the sense of ownership women have over kids. It takes two to make a kid, and it's not YOUR kid. It is your AND somebody else's kid, and that somebody else is not a voiceless sperm donor or check provider.

 

That is not a focus of this debate at all. I have in no way been discussing the merits of my husband's parenting skills, which I hold in high regard. He's a great dad, certainly not just a sperm donor or a wallet. We have also not been discussing the relative roles of men vs. women in parenting roles. What IS under discussion is the bond of trust between husband and wife, and whether the wife might feel hurt and insulted if the husband, with zero provocation, insinuates that he does NOT trust her or believe in her. The answer is: yes. The wife is very likely to feel hurt and insulted.

 

This should not come as a big surprise.

[troggleputty]

Well you just pulled that scenario out of thin air didn't you. I never said anything of the sort. Sounds to me like you're upset about biological facts and your inability to get pregnant. Not mine or any other woman's fault you can't do it. Its kinda like saying you have no responsibility to tell women you have HPV because its not like you can get ovarian cancer.

 

And this STILL makes it about trust issues. You're right women can't be duped into unwittingly raising a kid that isn't ours. To ask for a DNA test because you don't want to be unwittingly raising a kid that isn't yours IS to suggest she had sex with someone else.

 

What I was responding to that you had previously said was that each person takes a risk in a relationship which requires trust. But that's not true. There's a risk taken by the man that is NOT taken by the woman. And you obviously know that as indicated by this post, but you didn't want to admit that before, until I pointed it out to you.

 

Asking for a DNA test doesn't "suggest" anything. Actually it might mean that the man believes the child is his, but simply wants the test as conclusive proof. Why would you have a problem with that? Don't you believe it to be at least remotely possible that your male partner has cheated on you at some point in the relationship? Is it impossible that he's ever cheated on you?

 

You've been divorced before. Why? Did your ex ever cheat on you? Did your ex ever do something unacceptable, a violation of the marital relationship, even if not cheating? If not, why did you get divorced? Did you ever violate your marital relationship with your ex?

 

Are you even married to your current partner? Do you even have kids with your current partner? If not why are you even still involved in this discussion?

 

Again - is asking for a paternity test when having been given no reason to think infidelity is going on an insult? Yes it is.

 

Expecting me to believe that you have never ever cheated in any relationship you've ever been in, when you are an anonymous stranger on the internet and I have absolutely no objective way of verifying your claim, is certainly an insult to my intelligence.

 

The very defensive nature of your posting in this thread, and the obvious hostility, almost visceral, towards men you've expressed, makes it very very likely that you're actually not being truthful when you say you've never ever cheated. I'm sorry if you don't like that, and it's certainly not intended as an insult. But you sound very much like you have a very very guilty conscience.

 

Innocent people simply don't behave the way you've been behaving in this thread. And that's based on my experience.

 

And you know what sara? Your experience, your words, are no more nor less credible than mine are.

[troggleputty]

I have an extreme hostility to stupidity. Thanks for playing that role tonight.

 

I ALREADY ANSWERED IT TWO TIMES.

 

 

Well then I would like to know why your marriage failed. If you are such an expert on marital relationships that is.

[Stung]

 

Oh I know why. Because you have difficulty thinking in strictly logical terms.

 

Considering the over-the-top hyperbole I watch you fling all over the internet as you heave theatrical typographical sighs and make nonsensical arguments focused on your own projections this is...rich. I actually appreciate the laugh.

 

But I'm going to end communication with you on that note because I am familiar with your trollery and poor reading comprehension, and I know the golden internet rule about the biggest ass braying the loudest. You bray louder than me. Congratulations on that.

[troggleputty]

This was also already covered. Any test you do on your own is not valid in the court.

 

Wow. This is just stunning.

 

Whoever said that it was necessary to have a court approved DNA test to personally satisfy a husband's concerns about paternity? A court approved test is only necessary if the issue actually needs to be litigated, i.e. if there is a divorce action or a paternity action in a court of law.

 

Who cares if a home DNA test is not valid in a court of law? So what?

 

 

 

you're going to have to state your claim and the court will arrange a test in an approved, unbiased lab conducted by trained people.

 

LOL. You actually sound as if you've been through a paternity proceeding in court already. But again: who's asking for a court approved test? Now all of a sudden, you're a stickler for reliability and accuracy? Why is that?

 

Did your ex husband doubt paternity, demand a test from you, and that's why you divorced him?

 

 

 

And no, unless you're married and on that birth certificate, you cannot make off with some woman's kid and have it medically tested in a lab somewhere without her consent. We call that kidnapping.

 

LOL what the heck are you talking about now? If the woman isn't claiming that a child is yours, in fact is claiming the opposite (according to you), how does that have any bearing on the topic we have been discussing?

[troggleputty]

what is the point of entering into a debate if you're just going to call folks a liar when you don't get the responses you want?

 

Judge and jury? Gotta be right by any means possible?

How narcissistic of you.

 

 

He he he. Where did I call anyone a liar, sara?

 

I simply pointed out that your statement that you've never cheated could either be a lie, or it could be the truth, but you have no way of verifying your claim. Ergo why should anyone believe it?

[sally4sara]

Well then I would like to know why your marriage failed. If you are such an expert on marital relationships that is.

 

My marriage failed because he was a cheating drunk who admitted after the fact to compromising the condoms I asked him to wear because the marriage was going down the tubes.

He figured it would force me to stay.

And it did, till he walked out the door to go cheat some more.

I made sure it stayed over and done by not taking him back when he came crawling home a month later.

[sally4sara]

So every father is like your ex?

 

Is that what I said?

 

My husband is an excellent father to my son - he is obviously not my ex so I'm not sure why you're hearing me say all fathers are like my ex.

my ex however is like my father, and my brother's father, and two of my current coworker's kids fathers, and two of my ex coworker's kids fathers, and my exroomate's kids mother.

 

I'm still able to recognize the good fathers I know and see. Unlike you a assumes everyone is - oh wait none of your experiences were with dead beat parents. hmmmm.

[Woggle]

Is that what I said?

 

My husband is an excellent father to my son - he is obviously not my ex so I'm not sure why you're hearing me say all fathers are like my ex.

my ex however is like my father, and my brother's father, and two of my current coworker's kids fathers, and two of my ex coworker's kids fathers, and my exroomate's kids mother.

 

I'm still able to recognize the good fathers I know and see. Unlike you a assumes everyone is - oh wait none of your experiences were with dead beat parents. hmmmm.

 

It sort of came across that way even if that is not what you intended. There are men like that but there are also men like my close friend who has raised his daughter on his own and is by any standard a great father while his ex ran off with a convicted criminal. It does sort of anger that men like him get overlooked while we constantly hear about deadbeat dads.

[sally4sara]

It sort of came across that way even if that is not what you intended. There are men like that but there are also men like my close friend who has raised his daughter on his own and is by any standard a great father while his ex ran off with a convicted criminal. It does sort of anger that men like him get overlooked while we constantly hear about deadbeat dads.

 

My ex roomate is a single dad in a deadbeat mom situation. He started a great support group for single fathers with a focus on knowing and protecting their rights as fathers and primary caregivers. Great guy! Our sons are the same age. He got married about two years ago and just had another kid. No request for a paternity test involved even though he is a journalist and travels a lot.

[Woggle]

My ex roomate is a single dad in a deadbeat mom situation. He started a great support group for single fathers with a focus on knowing and protecting their rights as fathers and primary caregivers. Great guy! Our sons are the same age. He got married about two years ago and just had another kid. No request for a paternity test involved even though he is a journalist and travels a lot.

 

Meybe you weren't bashing all fathers and I apologize if I made that aasertion. I am just very defensive about perceived misandry. I understand how you as an honest women would be hurt if your husband wanted a paternity test but I wish see it from the point of view of men who have dealt with some not so honest women.

[A O]

I smell something fishy. Not necessarily in terms of legitimate doubts about the paternity, but in terms of a pretty despotic attitude that would blow up the marriage by itself

I've just learnt a new word - despotic - which in the context of this thread is highly relevant.

 

 

.

[A O]

What IS under discussion is the bond of trust between husband and wife, and whether the wife might feel hurt and insulted if the husband, with zero provocation, insinuates that he does NOT trust her or believe in her. The answer is: yes. The wife is very likely to feel hurt and insulted.

Indeed and totally understandable. But hurt or annoyed to the point of walking out the door, as some here advocate, now, that's something else again.

 

.

[sally4sara]

Meybe you weren't bashing all fathers and I apologize if I made that aasertion. I am just very defensive about perceived misandry. I understand how you as an honest women would be hurt if your husband wanted a paternity test but I wish see it from the point of view of men who have dealt with some not so honest women.

 

No problem and thanks woggle.

 

For clairity tho, he isn't angry at women.

[troggleputty]

No. You completely and utterly missed the point.

 

I'll let you try to make it in an understandable way, if you can.

 

 

If you had unprotected sex with your partner while she was fertile and she then gets pregnant, the only way to prove you're NOT the father is to have a paternity test. Consequently any guy who says, "I'm not the father, why won't you believe me?" in that situation is full of it. He could very well be the father and he literally has no way of knowing.

 

If she had sex with another man around the same time, she has no way of knowing, either.

 

Right. The only way of either the man or woman knowing about the paternity is to do the test. So we're in agreement about that. The DNA test is necessary to confirm paternity.

 

 

 

Hey, buddy! Do me a favor and find where I used the words "permission" or "allowed" in my post. Thank you! :)

 

You just did.

 

 

 

If you're in a healthy relationship where you trust your partner and there aren't any suspicious things that would make you think they're cheating, then, yes, it's normal to take your partner's word for it.

 

Now you're equivocating. Obviously any relationship where the man thinks a DNA test to be necessary in the first place will most likely have grounds for suspicion. Why else would the man insist on a DNA test, in the first place? Would you ladies please stop putting the cart before the horse?

 

 

Hmm, yes, I've never seen a thread on this board about a man cheating. It's only women who cheat and lie.

 

No, it's only women who are capable of cheating, lying, and bearing a child which is not also their partners' child, without their partner knowing it. But please feel free to keep evading and/or missing "the point."

 

 

You keep using words I've never used.

 

Excuse me? Which words have I used that you have never used?

 

 

A man is certainly entitled to demand a paternity test. That doesn't mean it won't damage the relationship he has with his partner in a situation where he has absolutely no reason to suspect cheating.

 

Again you're putting the cart before the horse. The relationship is ALREADY damaged if the husband feels so insecure about his wife's fidelity as to need a DNA test. And in that event, a DNA test which reassures the man about paternity will improve his security, and therefore improve, not hurt, the relationship.

 

The only thing that is "hurt" is the lady's ego: "Oh my how could he ever believe I would ever cheat on him?" Well maybe because of your behavior lady. Change your behavior so as to be completely trustworthy in all aspects of your relationship and I have the feeling DNA testing won't be an issue for you.

 

 

If a woman were ever to attempt to use legal avenues to demand child support payments from a man, she would be required to prove paternity.

 

Only if he denies paternity. And she would have that right, that's no problem.

 

 

 

Who said jack f-ing sh-t about stopping people from exercising their rights?

 

You did and you're about to do so, again.

 

 

 

 

"Your partner would probably be hurt and upset" is not equivalent to "X should not be allowed to do Y". Stop equivocating.

It most certainly is at least in this context. The females are stating that, although the man has the absolute right to have a DNA test, i.e. he is "allowed" to do it, this will cause the female to use emotional blackmail to make him feel guilty for exercising his legal rights.

 

Stop the emotional blackmail, ladies. It's time to grow up isn't it? It's just a DNA test, after all. It's not as if your husband is asking you to wash the dishes, vaccuum the living room, or have sex with him.

 

 

 

 

THE HYPOTHETICAL IN THE OP WAS ABOUT A CASE WHERE THERE IS NO REASON TO SUSPECT CHEATING.

 

I think you misunderstand the intent of what was posted. There might be no reason specific to the particular relationship to suspect cheating. However there must be a reason to suspect cheating which is non-specific to the relationship, or there would be no need to ask for the test. Obviously the OP didn't use those exact words, but you need to learn how to actually understand what is meant by the words used.

 

So yes there is a reason to suspect cheating, resulting in the demand for the DNA testing, but it is not specific to the relationship. The reason is statistical in nature. A certain non-zero but statistically significant percentage of women bear children from OM's unbenknownst to the husbands. The reason for demanding the DNA testing in the absence of relationship-specific evidence or "a reason" for individual suspicion is precisely because there is a statistically significant percentage probability that a child of any random relationship may actually be an OM's child.

 

If what you are saying is that you interpreted the OP as meaning that there is No reason whatsoever to suspect cheating then I just think you need to perceive and think a little more logically. The entire thread makes no sense if you assume the OP meant that: 1) There is statistically speaking a zero percent chance that my wife has cheated on me. 2) Nevertheless should I waste $100 on a DNA test, merely to hurt her feelings?

 

Is that what you think the OP meant? No wonder you are so angry and confused about this issue.

 

 

 

Again, that's PATENTLY UNTRUE. THE OP SAYS IT APPLIES EVEN WHEN HIS PARTNER HAS GIVEN NO REASON TO SUSPECT CHEATING.

 

 

 

Right. His partner has given him no reason to suspect. I.e. no relationship-specific reason to suspect. That however does not eliminate the non-zero probability that despite the absence of relationship-specific evidence of cheating, she nevertheless did cheat on him, and in fact got pregnant by an OM.

 

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

 

 

 

 

So many human beings cheat at the drop of a hat. What's your point?

 

Since you seem to accept the general prevalence of a lot of cheating then there is absolutely no rational reason for you to object to DNA testing without individualized suspicion. It is the exact same principle as is used in any random testing such as airport screening, traffic sobriety checkpoints, etc. When you are searched at the airport it is not because the security officers actually believe you personally are a danger. It is because there is a statistically significant probability that you might be a danger and therefore everyone must be screened, even though the vast majority of passengers do NOT pose ANY danger.

 

But we are talking math and statistics now, so I don't really expect you to understand that type of reasoning.

 

 

 

Most rapists are men. I better pepper spray that guy walking down the street to be safe and give myself peace of mind.

 

Your analogy fails completely. If a husband wants a DNA test no one is physically assaulted with a weapon as you are suggesting. Don't be so histrionic about it. It's only a quick swab with a q-tip after all.

 

 

Then he has trust issues to resolve.

 

It doesn't necessarily have to do anything with trust, although in the vast majority of cases we have to assume that the husband does not feel his wife is particularly trustworthy. However DNA paternity tests can be justified based on statistical reasoning alone. See above.

 

 

I've never cheated but I've been cheated on, yet I trust my partner.

 

How is it possible you were cheated on? You trusted the partner who cheated on you before you found out about the cheating, correct? Did the fact that you trusted that partner mean he was not a cheater?

 

Are you starting to "get it" yet? I can trust someone and they can be a cheater; I can fail to trust someone, and they can be totally innocent. My trust or lack thereof does not necessarily say anything at all about my partner, although it might, if my instincts are accurate. Yours were not. Why should anyone be so arrogant as to make the exact same mistake that you did, i.e. trust someone who should not be trusted?

 

 

That's right, I'm responsible for the actions of my entire gender.

If you contend that a woman has a right to behave in certain ways because she is a woman, then yes in a sense you are taking the brunt of what other women may have done to your partner in the past.

 

For example although you claim to trust your current partner, there is absolutely no way that your general level of trust in human nature can have been unimpaired by the cheating episode of your former partner. Being a victim of cheating changes a person and if you claim otherwise then LOL no one will believe you. At least no one will believe you who has ever been cheated on themselves.

 

If a woman assumes every guy talking to her is a potential rapist, then that's YOUR fault, baby. Right?

 

I have absolutely no problem with a woman being very careful about the men she chooses to spend her time with. So as a matter of fact yes, a woman is rational to view strange random men as potential rapists. Because sometimes they are, and she would be stupid to ignore that reality.

[sally4sara]

Now you're equivocating. Obviously any relationship where the man thinks a DNA test to be necessary in the first place will most likely have grounds for suspicion. Why else would the man insist on a DNA test, in the first place? Would you ladies please stop putting the cart before the horse?

 

And there it finally is. The most irrational, presumably male voice in the thread finally admits it is a trust issue.

So yes, asking for a paternity test with no reason for a lack of trust is insulting.

[troggleputty]

The only reason I brought up that scenario was exactly to point out what a gross and offensive generalization it was.

 

No, it is more or less a literally correct generalization. If you want to allow yourself to be constantly offended by literally correct statements then be my guest, but you may find yourself feeling offended frequently.

 

All men who have functional "equipment" to perform intercourse are obviously "potential rapists." Emphasis being on "potential." They are also potential soldiers; potential lawyers; potential doctors; and potential snowboarders. What of it? If there was a simple test available using a q-tip and costing $100 to conclusively determine who in our society was a rapist and who was not, it would be of very great benefit to all of society to require all men to take such a test. And I would heartily endorse such a test as mandatory.

 

 

 

Can you not see that claiming all men are potential rapists is a flip side to claiming ALL women are potentially cheating on their husbands and forcing their husbands through ongoing gross deception to raise a child not biologically theirs?

 

Yes. Both generalizations are, for the most part, literally correct. Except you have misstated the generalization: It is not that ALL women are potentially cheating; it is that ANY particular woman is potentially a cheater. There's a difference in the two statements, you know. I think there's pretty much of a zero percent chance that at any given moment ALL women are cheaters. However it is a 100% certainty that at any given moment, SOME women are cheaters. The problem is there is no reliable way to determine who is, and who isn't, because the cheaters lie about it. People who don't cheat say they don't cheat; but people who do cheat say exactly the same thing. At least to their betrayed partners, they do.

 

 

Is that not a gross and offensive generalization?

 

Only if you find the truth to be offensive.

 

 

Yes, some women have done that, it is a sad and terrible thing with negative repercussions. Some men are also rapists, also a sad and terrible thing with very negative repercussions.

 

And both statements are true ones. The difference is that we do not currently have a $100 test involving a quick q-tip swab that can conclusively determine who is and who is not a rapist. If we had such a test we should definitely use it.

 

Actually such tests are used in the criminal justice system to help the unfairly accused prove their innocence and to a large extent they have revolutionized aspects of our criminal justice system.

 

It's time to come out of the 19th century ladies, when all ladies were presumed to be chaste and virtuous, and any inference to the contrary was deemed a grievous insults to the lady's honor, punishable by dueling with pistols at ten paces at sunrise.

[Woggle]

No problem and thanks woggle.

 

For clairity tho, he isn't angry at women.

 

Neither is my friend but my issues go way beyond that. I am starting to believe I am effed up beyond repair but that is another thread. Believe it or not this is the healthiest I know how to be.

[troggleputty]

And there it finally is. The most irrational, presumably male voice in the thread finally admits it is a trust issue.

So yes, asking for a paternity test with no reason for a lack of trust is insulting.

 

 

LOL it is you who is irrational. You choose to view a man's absolute right to access a DNA paternity test as an affront to your virtue rather than what it really is: The only way of obtaining scientific proof/verification of the woman's alleged virtue. Rather than fear DNA testing, you should welcome and invite it.

 

Again: what is so scary to you about a little q-tip? Why do you have such a guilty conscience?

 

Why did your first marriage fail?

[troggleputty]

My marriage failed because he was a cheating drunk who admitted after the fact to compromising the condoms I asked him to wear because the marriage was going down the tubes.

He figured it would force me to stay.

And it did, till he walked out the door to go cheat some more.

I made sure it stayed over and done by not taking him back when he came crawling home a month later.

 

 

Well that's sad but at least I now know the source of your hatred of all men.

[troggleputty]

 

Considering the over-the-top hyperbole I watch you fling all over the internet as you heave theatrical typographical sighs and make nonsensical arguments focused on your own projections this is...rich. I actually appreciate the laugh.

 

But I'm going to end communication with you on that note because I am familiar with your trollery and poor reading comprehension, and I know the golden internet rule about the biggest ass braying the loudest. You bray louder than me. Congratulations on that.

 

 

If the stretch pants fit, then wear them, honey.

[troggleputty]

Is that what I said?

 

My husband is an excellent father to my son - he is obviously not my ex so I'm not sure why you're hearing me say all fathers are like my ex.

my ex however is like my father, and my brother's father, and two of my current coworker's kids fathers, and two of my ex coworker's kids fathers, and my exroomate's kids mother.

 

I'm still able to recognize the good fathers I know and see. Unlike you a assumes everyone is - oh wait none of your experiences were with dead beat parents. hmmmm.

 

 

Sara, with all respect, it sounds like you don't actually have any children with your current husband, so this entire discussion is not even an issue for you on a personal basis.

 

Why is it so important for you?

[sally4sara]

LOL it is you who is irrational. You choose to view a man's absolute right to access a DNA paternity test as an affront to your virtue rather than what it really is: The only way of obtaining scientific proof/verification of the woman's alleged virtue. Rather than fear DNA testing, you should welcome and invite it.

 

Again: what is so scary to you about a little q-tip? Why do you have such a guilty conscience?

 

Why did your first marriage fail?

 

already posted on it and I'm not going to do it again if you're not going to bother to read it despite the fact you will only say I'm liar as it doesn't support your - what? giant mess of I can't even tell anymore.