Paternity Test Before Signing As the Father...?

[USMCHokie]

From what I've observed, paternity tests are irrelevant to men who already love a child. It may effect how he feels about the child's mother, but doesn't necessarily change desire to be the dad to this non-hypothetical child he's held, fed, loved, and thought of as his own.

 

And this comes back to the original point of this thread...should men be given the opportunity to ensure that they want to love the child before he becomes emotionally and financially invested in it?

 

Would it be different if the woman cheated and had a child with a man of a different race and the baby's appearance was enough to suggest infidelity?

[xxoo]

We can not test until after birth. That's already too late in many cases. The love is well established by that point.

[USMCHokie]

There are some pretty disheartening stories out there. For example, a woman gets pregnant and has a kid. Her husband raises the kid with her thinking it was his own. A few years later, the wife leaves him for another guy who actually turned out to be the kid's biological father. The court ruled that the ex-husband has to pay for child support, while the child gets to live with her mother and biological father. Although the ex-husband was granted partial custody, how is the kid going to grow up having to spend half her time with this other guy who isn't her "real dad"?

 

Where is the justice in that?

[carhill]

Hokie's post about hospital paternity tests caused me to check out some current numbers and I found that, on average, a live healthy vaginal birth (like when I was born) in a hospital in Cali, inclusive of pre/post natal care, runs between 10-12K. Paternity tests, legally admissible in court, from private contractors run between 400-600, so about 5% of live birth costs. Considering the legal and financial ramifications of paternity, IMO an average of 500 bucks would be a prudent and reasonable cost to bear. This also brings up another subject.... who pays for the birth? In some cases, presuming unmarried, insurance does, along with a co-pay from the insured (mother, I presume); in some cases it's cash; in some cases the government pays (Medicaid).

 

In doing some research I also found that a couple which is legally married when the baby is born can deny legal paternity for the husband if they both sign an appropriate legal document denying paternity for him, then can pursue paternity, including testing, for/with an unrelated (to the marriage) third party father, either through a voluntary acknowledgment of paternity or court action. Interesting. An example of this would be a woman pregnant with another man's child when she gets married. It happens, and not necessarily because she was 'cheating'. Life can be complex.

[USMCHokie]

In doing some research I also found that a couple which is legally married when the baby is born can deny legal paternity for the husband if they both sign an appropriate legal document denying paternity for him, then can pursue paternity, including testing, for/with an unrelated (to the marriage) third party father, either through a voluntary acknowledgment of paternity or court action. Interesting. An example of this would be a woman pregnant with another man's child when she gets married. It happens, and not necessarily because she was 'cheating'. Life can be complex.

 

Does this require consent from both parties, or can one party stay legal paternity pending a paternity test, even against the wishes of the other party? That is, can the husband refuse legal paternity until after a test verifies factual paternity?

[Citizen Erased]

If there was no reasoning behind it and it was just irrational stupidity, I would consider the relationship to be ended.

[carhill]

Does this require consent from both parties, or can one party stay legal paternity pending a paternity test, even against the wishes of the other party? That is, can the husband refuse legal paternity until after a test verifies factual paternity?

My research indicates that both parties must sign such a document, I forget the document number here in Cali, and of course signatures cannot be coerced, as there are authentication requirements. Absent that, it's lawyer time. Just about any legal position can be forwarded presuming the advocate has sufficiently deep pockets.

 

As an example, if was was married and suspected my wife was having the child of another man, I couldn't unilaterally deny paternity but she and I could jointly and voluntarily deny my paternity, or I could seek legal relief if such denial was not forthcoming. Essentially, if the mother doesn't agree, it's court time. That's my understanding at this point, relative to a married couple in Cali.

[xxoo]

The health bills for a pregnancy are for the mother, not the baby. If the couple is not married, the male partner has no legal responsibility to pay those medical bills. Is it common for unmarried couples to pay each other's medical bills?

 

After the baby is born, the baby incurs its own medical bills.

 

Also, is there a prenatal pregnancy test? Because the bulk of those prenatal medical bills are due before the birth. My doctors wanted my portion paid in full by the 9th month, before paternity could be established.

[Keenly]

I thought people would be able to be adults about this situation. Instead of getting all offended, realize that this is 18 years of responsibility. Instead of overreacting and getting your feelers hurt just go with it. Especially if you have nothing to hide. Women have done this to themselves by proving some are capable of getting knocked up by man A and then telling man B that be is the father.

 

I bet that girl would throw the biggest fit of all if asked that question .

[Keenly]

This strikes very close to home with me. Shortly after ex and I broke up she told me she was pregnant. I said okay and rolled with it. A month or so later I said I wanted a paternity test.

 

 

she FREAKED OUT and got so angry, throwing things, calling me names, yelling about how she could not believe I didn't trust her.

 

 

Guess what happened? She stopped telling me I was the father , and refusd to take the test. Hmmmmm interesting.

[Eggplant]

Do you think it'd be in the public interest to make it a part of the birth process at the hospital? That is, every baby gets tested...? Or is that not feasible...?

 

I'd be for this option, but not mandated.

 

As a woman, I know 100% who my biological children are, and I want the father of my children to know with the same certainty (that certainty benefits everybody). I told my ex that if we ever got married and had children, that we could take a paternity test if he wanted. I am loyal, and any man who marries me will have that option.

[carhill]

The health bills for a pregnancy are for the mother, not the baby. If the couple is not married, the male partner has no legal responsibility to pay those medical bills. Is it common for unmarried couples to pay each other's medical bills?

 

It's becoming increasingly common here in California for employers to provide health insurance, including maternity benefits, for domestic partner situations, both hetero and homo, hence it's entirely possible that a man could be employed and his employer is providing his domestic partner with insurance benefits and her pregnancy would be covered under his insurance benefit. I'd have to check how the copays are handled but it is conceivable that the primary insured, in my example the man, could be legally liable for the copays. One of my friends insures his employee's domestic partners and he'll have the latest on Cali statute as insurance is almost a full-time job for a couple of his employees. I'll be seeing him this week and will find out more.

 

In a MediCal situation, that's individual, and the mother would be covered by the government benefit. The father, relevant to the pregnancy, appears to not be involved at all.

 

Given that choice to proceed (or not) with a pregnancy lies primarily with the woman, fairness would dictate a level playing field relevant to the financial aspects of the process. At this point that's still a work in progress, especially relevant to pregnancies which are not attributable to the woman's apparent partner/spouse. That reality would drive my seeking competent legal advice if faced with an apparent or suspected such situation.

[xxoo]

It's becoming increasingly common here in California for employers to provide health insurance, including maternity benefits, for domestic partner situations, both hetero and homo, hence it's entirely possible that a man could be employed and his employer is providing his domestic partner with insurance benefits and her pregnancy would be covered under his insurance benefit. I'd have to check how the copays are handled but it is conceivable that the primary insured, in my example the man, could be legally liable for the copays. One of my friends insures his employee's domestic partners and he'll have the latest on Cali statute as insurance is almost a full-time job for a couple of his employees. I'll be seeing him this week and will find out more.

 

In a MediCal situation, that's individual, and the mother would be covered by the government benefit. The father, relevant to the pregnancy, appears to not be involved at all.

 

Given that choice to proceed (or not) with a pregnancy lies primarily with the woman, fairness would dictate a level playing field relevant to the financial aspects of the process. At this point that's still a work in progress, especially relevant to pregnancies which are not attributable to the woman's apparent partner/spouse. That reality would drive my seeking competent legal advice if faced with an apparent or suspected such situation.

 

If you've added your domestic partner. It's optional, and adding your partner is analogous to a "marriage" gesture to me.

 

The fact remains that the medical charges are for the woman, not the baby. If you've added your partner, and your partner has medical bills related to pregnancy, the bills are for your partner--the person you carry on your health insurance--not the baby, who you may or may not add to your insurance after birth. So it isn't really paying for the baby. It is paying the medical needs for the partner you added to your insurance.

 

I'm just trying to point out that the paternity test comes after the pregnancy expenses are already paid, for the most part. So it isn't typically possible to take a paternity test to avoid pregnancy costs.

[sweetjasmine]

I'm just trying to point out that the paternity test comes after the pregnancy expenses are already paid, for the most part. So it isn't typically possible to take a paternity test to avoid pregnancy costs.

 

Nor is it possible to take a paternity test before becoming emotionally involved, especially in the case of couples who are actively trying to have children.

 

If my H and I were trying to have a baby, and he demanded a paternity test once s/he was born, I'd be devastated. I just think of the couples I know who had a difficult time trying to conceive and who spent month after month waiting to see what would happen. I can't imagine going through the trial of trying to get pregnant, finally succeeding, and bringing a healthy baby to term only to have the person who was by your side during the whole grueling process tell you that they don't trust you enough to assume it's actually theirs.

[Phoebe]

I thought people would be able to be adults about this situation. Instead of getting all offended, realize that this is 18 years of responsibility. Instead of overreacting and getting your feelers hurt just go with it. Especially if you have nothing to hide. Women have done this to themselves by proving some are capable of getting knocked up by man A and then telling man B that be is the father.

 

I bet that girl would throw the biggest fit of all if asked that question .

 

All women are not the same just as all men are not the same.

 

I can understand wanting to be 100% sure the child is yours especially if you didn't want it in the first place, there's a history of cheating, or if your relationship was of the off/on again variety. I wouldn't even have a problem with mandatory testing.

 

What I would find offensive is being in a stable, loving relationship and having the father insist on a paternity test. What you are basically saying is that you don't trust the mother, that you believe she is capable of cheating on you, putting both herself and yourself at risk from STDs by having unprotected sex and being deceitful enough to pass another mans child off as yours. Are there women out there like that? I'm sure there are, but I doubt that they are in the majority.

 

After getting over my disbelief of being accused of something so horrible, just because other women have been known to do it, I would have to seriously contemplate if I wanted to be in a relationship with someone who obviously had such a low opinion of me.

[tbf]

Got it. But we all want to think that we are ultimately trustworthy and can do no wrong...but people make mistakes, don't they? Do you think the attitude that "if you can't trust me, then leave" still counts if the person can't be trusted?

Why would anyone stay with someone they don't trust? That's an emotionally dysfunctional relationship.

 

Looking at it from a different perspective, is there a duty for the woman to disclose that the kid might not be the guy's kid if she had sex outside of the relationship? Or is it ok to hide that under the veil of supreme trust....?

 

I think what you're both saying is probably good, but shouldn't it come with the presumption that the woman can be fully trusted?

 

Ladies, would you be offended if your man insisted upon a paternity test for your newborn child before he would sign the birth certificate accepting responsibility as father of that child?

Your parameters keep shifting. You initially asked it from a personal perspective. From my personal perspective, I don't cheat. And cheating isn't simply making a mistake. It requires active lying, manipulation and deception.

 

As far as nonsense en masse paternity testing just because a small percentage of men are hyper paranoid or remain with partners they don't trust or aren't trustworthy, they can pay for their own paranoia which includes the FU reaction of their partners.

[carhill]

If you've added your domestic partner. It's optional, and adding your partner is analogous to a "marriage" gesture to me.

 

The fact remains that the medical charges are for the woman, not the baby. If you've added your partner, and your partner has medical bills related to pregnancy, the bills are for your partner--the person you carry on your health insurance--not the baby, who you may or may not add to your insurance after birth. So it isn't really paying for the baby. It is paying the medical needs for the partner you added to your insurance.

 

I'm just trying to point out that the paternity test comes after the pregnancy expenses are already paid, for the most part. So it isn't typically possible to take a paternity test to avoid pregnancy costs.

No, it's not possible to, currently, perform a legally admissible paternity test prior to birth, AFAIK, but that wouldn't stop me from pursuing legal action to recover costs incurred as result of fraud, if such a test later confirmed other paternity and I was materially damaged. And, trust me, I would.

[tbf]

If by small percentage you mean 30% of those tested, sure.

That's an inaccurate figure.

 

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2730/whos-your-daddy

 

Roughly 20 years into the DNA-test era, better paternity data are available and scholars have devised better ways to break them down. For a 2006 survey anthropologist Kermyt Anderson took 67 studies that estimated nonpaternity rates and sorted them according to "paternity confidence": the high-confidence group included, e.g., nonrandom genetics studies of parents and children, which (Anderson reasoned) families would be unlikely to volunteer for if someone suspected the results might show that dad wasn't the kids' father; in the low-confidence group were straight-up paternity-dispute test data; and a third category contained studies from which one couldn't conclude anything about fathers' confidence.

 

Seen this way, the numbers yield a pretty convincing pattern. The median nonpaternity rate for the high-confidence group was a not-too-scandalous 1.7 percent, whereas the low-confidence group showed an unsurprisingly high rate of 29.8 percent - about what one might gather from watching a few weeks of Maury Povich. If you combine the first group with the can't-conclude group, which showed a rate of 16.7 percent, you get a rate around 3.3 percent, or a ninth of the low-confidence rate. While Anderson cautions that there's currently no way to figure out what percentage of total births are low- or high-confidence, and thus what a societywide nonpaternity rate might be, he does use figures from a paternity confidence study he conducted in Albuquerque to guess that the rate for that city as a whole would be under 4 percent.

 

Do you understand what the above means? It means that as a generality, men raising children that aren't their own, equal around 4%. Of the high confidence group, non-paternity would be around 1.7%. Of the low confidence group, around 29.8%. This means that men remain with partners they don't trust. Totally dysfunctional. If you don't trust your partner, leave.

[dreamingoftigers]

This strikes very close to home with me. Shortly after ex and I broke up she told me she was pregnant. I said okay and rolled with it. A month or so later I said I wanted a paternity test.

 

 

she FREAKED OUT and got so angry, throwing things, calling me names, yelling about how she could not believe I didn't trust her.

 

 

Guess what happened? She stopped telling me I was the father , and refusd to take the test. Hmmmmm interesting.

 

Keenly, from how unstable you've described her as: I don't think she knows who the father is.

 

Have you considered pursuing the test?

[dreamingoftigers]

I'm sorry..... 30%

 

Yeah, right.

 

I was 100% shocked to hear in some regions it would go up to 10%

 

But I honestly think that 4% is enough of a "fail rate" to encourage testing.

That's 1/25 kids!

 

Trust, but verify.

 

Frankly, I can see the obvious additional help it would provide to women as well: the confirmation of paternity to receive child-support in the future.

 

Additionally, I believe that some men would otherwise trust their partner but that the child may not resemble them. So they go around suspecting a paternity issue BUT feel uncertain in asking for confirmation for fear of being asked to leave for being doubtful of the woman's loyalty. That's got to have a "net effect" on a relationship. And possibly trouble bonding with the child.

[Revolver]

I honestly think the percentage of men raising kids that are not biologically there's(and don't know it) is much higher then they estimate.

[dreamingoftigers]

I honestly think the percentage of men raising kids that are not biologically there's(and don't know it) is much higher then they estimate.

 

Erm....that's why there were 67 quantifiable studies on the subject.

 

So those men that are "quite confident" that the child is theirs, are right 98.3% of the time.

 

The rest is mostly fear-mongering.

[ForeverHopeful1]

Another thread prompted me to ask this question...

 

Ladies, would you be offended if your man insisted upon a paternity test for your newborn child before he would sign the birth certificate accepting responsibility as father of that child?

 

And guys, would you ask for one, even if you had no reason to believe the child wasn't yours?

 

I probably wouldnt speak to my husband for 3 months if he asked me for a paternity test. He would be in the doghouse and regret ever asking this of me. We are currently trying for a baby and have been for 17-18 months now. I would hope that he would know it was his and I would hope he would know how ridiculous it would be to ask for a paternity test. I would be furious.

[pink_sugar]

Another thread prompted me to ask this question...

 

Ladies, would you be offended if your man insisted upon a paternity test for your newborn child before he would sign the birth certificate accepting responsibility as father of that child?

 

And guys, would you ask for one, even if you had no reason to believe the child wasn't yours?

 

Depends on the circumstances. If we weren't exclusive or were just dating, I would be surprised if he didn't want to be sure it was his child. However if we're living together or married, yeah there really shouldn't be any question about it.

[somedude81]

Given the number of men unknowingly raising children that aren't theirs, paternity testing should be mandatory for any and all live births.

OK, why isn't this just done automatically?

 

Would anybody be against having a paternity test be a standard procedure for all live births?