Paternity Test Before Signing As the Father...?

[sweetjasmine]

While I understand why women would be offended if they have done nothing wrong I also can't blame men for wanting peace of mind. I just don't see what is so wrong with proving to your spouse in legal writing that you are trustworthy. Why do some get so offended at that?

 

Hey, Wogs, if your wife walked up to you today and demanded you get a full STD panel because she read on the internet that some men have unprotected sex with hookers and she needed some peace of mind, just in case, how would you feel? You have nothing to hide, right?

[USMCHokie]

You're attempting to twist my words around.

 

Not twisting your words at all. I'm drawing logical inferences from the words you've written. In this case, I'm identifying the contrapositive:

 

If into truth and honesty, then paternity test.

If not paternity test, then not into truth and honesty.

 

It's dishonest because she's going to CARRY YOUR BABY with no inkling of what your intentions are.

 

If you are so convinced that your plan is logical, correct, and good, why are you so against letting a prospective partner know beforehand?

 

I'm not against this at all. I think this is an outstanding idea, much like discussing early on in the relationship the merits of a prenup and my requirement for one before marriage.

[USMCHokie]

Hey, Wogs, if your wife walked up to you today and demanded you get a full STD panel because she read on the internet that some men have unprotected sex with hookers and she needed some peace of mind, just in case, how would you feel? You have nothing to hide, right?

 

Well, looks like we're going on a trip to the doctor!

[Art_Critic]

I'm not against this at all. I think this is an outstanding idea, much like discussing early on in the relationship the merits of a prenup and my requirement for one before marriage.

 

I think the paternity test is nuts if you have no drop in trust to believe that your are NOT the father.

Do you assume that someone cheated merely because she got pregnant.

 

I also think that if a woman stays with someone after they first ask for a pre-nup, then get hit with the paternity test I would think she would be wondering what kind of man she married and if he is the kind of man she would want to be her husband and the father of her child....

 

Every can be a dick Hokie.. but most of us would rather not be.

[AlexDP]

It's been a while...

 

I understand that presumption, but isn't there another presumption that even if a child isn't yours, a man is presumed to be the parent after enough time is spent raising that child as if he were his? And any paternity test would hold little weight in relieving a man of parental responsibility?

 

 

 

In most jurisdictions it is actually different and somewhat awful:

 

If you spend enough time raising a child that isn't yours, you can actually end up having to pay for the child until it's 18. I'm not sure about the correct legal term in English, in Dutch it is called a "natural commitment". Basically, if you've been doing something for long enough, you're acknowledging that you should be doing it. It's iffy at best.

[USMCHokie]

I think the paternity test is nuts if you have no drop in trust to believe that your are NOT the father.

Do you assume that someone cheated merely because she got pregnant.

 

If I suggest a paternity test, is the underlying presumption that the child is not mine? Can't you suggest a paternity with full confidence simply to confirm your beliefs, i.e., the child is indeed yours...?

 

I also think that if a woman stays with someone after they first ask for a pre-nup, then get hit with the paternity test I would think she would be wondering what kind of man she married and if he is the kind of man she would want to be her husband and the father of her child....

 

Well, the presumption runs both ways...sure, a woman might presume that a guy who asks for these things is paranoid or not capable of trusting. On the other hand, a man might presume that a woman who refuses these things doubts her own trustworthiness or doesn't want to be held accountable if she falters.

 

So who wins...?

 

Every can be a dick Hokie.. but most of us would rather not be.

 

Sure, but perhaps it takes being a dick to protect yourself against another dick...?

[Els]

N

 

I'm not against this at all. I think this is an outstanding idea, much like discussing early on in the relationship the merits of a prenup and my requirement for one before marriage.

 

If you have given your partner the heads up early in the R that you're going to do this, and she agrees, sounds fine to me. In that case, she would have had the option to walk early on, so if she chooses to stay, I can't see any reason to blame you for getting the paternity test later on, as you mentioned.

 

I do think your M wouldn't be likely to turn out well with lack of trust, but if both of you are making the informed decision to go for it, who am I to say no?

[ASG]

If I suggest a paternity test, is the underlying presumption that the child is not mine? Can't you suggest a paternity with full confidence simply to confirm your beliefs, i.e., the child is indeed yours...?

 

Well, the presumption runs both ways...sure, a woman might presume that a guy who asks for these things is paranoid or not capable of trusting. On the other hand, a man might presume that a woman who refuses these things doubts her own trustworthiness or doesn't want to be held accountable if she falters.

 

So who wins...?

 

Sure, but perhaps it takes being a dick to protect yourself against another dick...?

 

Er... yes! Because otherwise, why would you ever ask for a paternity test if you had full confidence the child was yours?

 

For me though, I think you have a bigger problem... You only see children as a way for women to suck money out of you. That is the underlying theme of this thread.

And weren't you who also said that if you had step children you wouldn't pay for anything for them, as they weren't yours? (forgive me if it wasn't you, it was some time ago that that thread popped up)

If I am right in my assumption that it was indeed you, to me that corroborates what I've said earlier. You only see children as a way for women to suck money out of men.

 

If this is the case, then please, don't have any, as you're clearly not ready.

 

If I had a LTR or was married to someone and got pregnant and the guy asked me for a paternity test, he would be shown the door. If it was a fling, then sure, I'd go for it.

 

I would sign a pre-nup if one of the parties had a lot more wealth/assets than the other. Or I would get married with separation of assets and not even think about that.

[USMCHokie]

For me though, I think you have a bigger problem... You only see children as a way for women to suck money out of you. That is the underlying theme of this thread.

And weren't you who also said that if you had step children you wouldn't pay for anything for them, as they weren't yours? (forgive me if it wasn't you, it was some time ago that that thread popped up)

If I am right in my assumption that it was indeed you, to me that corroborates what I've said earlier. You only see children as a way for women to suck money out of men.

Yes, I did say that, and I will stand by it because I believe in it. If the father of that child was still in the child's life and was still paying child support, then I have no financial or parental responsibility for that child. I will be his/her friend.

 

And I don't think I'd hold these values so strongly if society and the law wasn't so lopsided in the matter and fails to hold both genders accountable for their misconduct. If a man cheats and the woman leaves him, then he loses X amount of assets and has to pay alimony and child support. If a woman cheats and the man leaves her, then she receives X amount of assets as well as alimony and child support. Can you explain the logic and reasoning behind this? Is this "equality" as women see it?

 

And it's truly unfortunate when these women who get custody use their children as weapons to get more money to fund their lifestyle. "Oh, I need more money to feed and clothe Bobby, so you better give it to me or I'll go to court! But really, I'm using that money to go on a vacation with the guy I cheated on you with! Teeheehee!"

[GorillaTheater]

I think that if you reasonably suspect your pregnant wife is cheating or recently has cheated, you'd be crazy not to get a paternity test as part of the broader divorce proceedings. Without reasonable cause, you'd be equally crazy to pursue it.

[ASG]

I'm sorry, I just can't see things the way you do and can't understand you.

My step dad provided for me for 20 years. I say provided, in the way that he paid for the house we lived in and paid for meals out and family holidays.

 

My mom paid for other things, like clothes and pocket money and she would also pay the house bills and buy the groceries (for the 4 of us, me and my brother, my mom and step dad), while my dad paid for school (they never had a fixed agreement, and neither walked away with any of the other one's assets, so...)

 

These days, my mom buys groceries and cooks food for my step brother. Who is a capable adult, I might add and has both a father and a mother.

 

Family relationships are NOT about money.

 

And I have to add... the walking away with half the assets and having to pay alimony bla bla bla is a very american thing. It doesn't work like that is most other countries. Like, for instance, where I'm from, if you marry with separation of assets, no one walks away with anything they didn't already own before the marriage and assets bought within the marriage are split 50/50 (if they were bought 50/50)

[Emilia]

And I have to add... the walking away with half the assets and having to pay alimony bla bla bla is a very american thing. It doesn't work like that is most other countries. Like, for instance, where I'm from, if you marry with separation of assets, no one walks away with anything they didn't already own before the marriage and assets bought within the marriage are split 50/50 (if they were bought 50/50)

Actually this is the same in my home country too.

[USMCHokie]

I'm sorry, I just can't see things the way you do and can't understand you.

 

I can accept that. I grew up in what you might call an "ideal" family environment. There was no step-anything in my family, even going beyond my immediate family. All my friends had their parents and families intact. So I have very little understanding of the "step-" concept and cannot attach emotions to what I feel is a flawed system.

 

Family relationships are NOT about money.

 

Of course not, but it's a factor. And it probably isn't a coincidence that money is the primary cause of divorce...?

 

And I have to add... the walking away with half the assets and having to pay alimony bla bla bla is a very american thing. It doesn't work like that is most other countries. Like, for instance, where I'm from, if you marry with separation of assets, no one walks away with anything they didn't already own before the marriage and assets bought within the marriage are split 50/50 (if they were bought 50/50)

 

How are kids handled? Is there a presumption, like in the US, that the mother is better suited to be the primary parent?

[will1988]

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'm white, my fiance is white and very pale at that... if she popped out a child that looked mixed I would ask for a paternity test. Not for a racial reasons, but for the fact that I now have reason to believe there was infadelity.

 

And to all of you PC police out there, yes I know it is possible to give birth to a baby that does not look the race of their parents but still be related... like the white baby born to nigerian parents etc... but those are very rare type of things.

[ASG]

I can accept that. I grew up in what you might call an "ideal" family environment. There was no step-anything in my family, even going beyond my immediate family. All my friends had their parents and families intact. So I have very little understanding of the "step-" concept and cannot attach emotions to what I feel is a flawed system.

How is it flawed?!?! How is taking care of your partner's kids a flawed thing?!

Sure, not everyone is as maternal/paternal... My aunt doesn't like her step kids one bit (well... this is an exaggeration, but she'd be happier if they weren't around -she's a bit jealous- (and crazy!), but she still cooks for them every day and takes care of them and is there for them if they need her (which they don't usually, as they're now young adults).

 

 

Of course not, but it's a factor. And it probably isn't a coincidence that money is the primary cause of divorce...?

 

Is it?! Cause of all the divorce cases I'm aware of (and there's a LOT of that in my family), money was never the issue. Cheating, falling out of love, being incompatible... those were the reasons for divorce. Money never was.

Where are you getting your facts from?!

 

How are kids handled? Is there a presumption, like in the US, that the mother is better suited to be the primary parent?

 

Yes, the mother is presumed better suited, but that doesn't mean anything. That is a standard. If a father wants to fight it, he can and should!

My cousins live with their dad, and have done so ever since he's had a house big enough to have them, after the divorce (that happened less than a year after the divorce, I might add)

A lot of people have shared custody arrangements, in that the kids spend half the time with one parent, half the time with the other. I know a few cases.

 

Others have regular custody agreements, in which the mother has the child for most of the time and the dad gets every other weekend. Even then, most cases I know, the dad is free to see the children on other days that aren't his weekend.

[USMCHokie]

How is it flawed?!?!

 

Gender bias of the system.

 

Is it?! Cause of all the divorce cases I'm aware of (and there's a LOT of that in my family), money was never the issue. Cheating, falling out of love, being incompatible... those were the reasons for divorce. Money never was.

Where are you getting your facts from?!

 

Read it from a few different sources somewhere that disagreement on money was one of the leading causes of married couples splitting.

 

Yes, the mother is presumed better suited, but that doesn't mean anything. That is a standard. If a father wants to fight it, he can and should!

 

Yep...fight and oftentimes lose... Courts in the US tend to be unjustifiably biased towards women when it comes to child custody and support. I guess the men in many of those cases are to blame for not standing up for themselves.

[ASG]

Gender bias of the system.

 

Read it from a few different sources somewhere that disagreement on money was one of the leading causes of married couples splitting.

 

Yep...fight and oftentimes lose... Courts in the US tend to be unjustifiably biased towards women when it comes to child custody and support. I guess the men in many of those cases are to blame for not standing up for themselves.

 

Wait... What gender bias? We're talking about step kids, right? What's gender biased about that?

 

Well, to be honest, the mother is more often than not the primary care giver of a young child. In a big part due to nature. Seeing as how it's the mother who actually gives birth and feeds the child for a few months after they are born.

Are you saying that, in case of divorce with a newborn baby the mother should not be the primary custodian of the child (barring any horrific reasons she shouldn't be, like drug abuse or something like that)?

 

Also, from about 12 years old, the children are actually heard when it comes to custody agreements and can decide who they want to live with. That audience bears a lot of weight on the judges decision of who gains custody.

 

Sure, things have been changing and fathers now can take paternity leave in equal parts as the mother, but speaking for myself and *my* experience as a child of divorce... my dad couldn't fry an egg! He would have absolutely NO clue as to how to take care of us! He'd be able to take us to school, but that would have been it!

 

And, with men now more attuned to the household chores, things have also been changing in the custody department. It's now not that uncommon to have dads who are primary custodians or who share half the custody.

[ScreamingTrees]

How is it flawed?!?! How is taking care of your partner's kids a flawed thing?!

Sure, not everyone is as maternal/paternal... My aunt doesn't like her step kids one bit (well... this is an exaggeration, but she'd be happier if they weren't around -she's a bit jealous- (and crazy!), but she still cooks for them every day and takes care of them and is there for them if they need her (which they don't usually, as they're now young adults).

 

Yes, the mother is presumed better suited, but that doesn't mean anything. That is a standard. If a father wants to fight it, he can and should!

My cousins live with their dad, and have done so ever since he's had a house big enough to have them, after the divorce (that happened less than a year after the divorce, I might add)

A lot of people have shared custody arrangements, in that the kids spend half the time with one parent, half the time with the other. I know a few cases.

 

Others have regular custody agreements, in which the mother has the child for most of the time and the dad gets every other weekend. Even then, most cases I know, the dad is free to see the children on other days that aren't his weekend.

 

Simply because it doesn't occur amongst your kin, doesn't mean that finances are not a major factor in many divorces.

 

If I was the biological father of a child and I was getting a divorce.. I wouldn't settle for seeing the child every other weekend. I'd get the child one week, my ex would get the child the next week.. Or we'd split each week in half. Assuming we both have clean criminal records and there's really no way for me to prove that I am an unfit parent other than to just point fingers, I don't see how that would be unfair. I would do anything that I possibly could to fight for this.

 

If I'd ever found myself in a relationship where I'd come to the realization that the child wasn't mine, I personally wouldn't want to take care of the child.

 

Now, if I'd ENTERED a relationship knowing that the child was not mine, I would willingly care for this child. But I KNOW that I would most likely never choose something so far removed from the ideal.. It would take a very special person.. Besides, I would assume that the biological father would be providing for the child financially so that I wouldn't have to.. It's really the father's responsibility for bringing the child into this world in the first place.

 

If someone chose to get knocked up or willingly have a child with a dead beat loser, then they're just a sucker in my book. How difficult can it be? If the courts are so hard on men, why are there so many single mothers on their own? They may not expect any new men to take care of their child, and they may even go out of their way to put the child first, a sentiment that I would fail to share, something special that I'd be unable to take part in..

 

It's not a matter of guys like Hokie or myself not being "paternal".. I'm assuming your aunt willingly chose to enter a relationship with someone who brought kids to the table? That's her own fault for allowing herself to become "trapped" in such a scenario.. If the kids were brought up due to infidelity, I can only imagine why she'd be a little bitter about taking care of a total stranger's kids..

[William]

Folks, just a reminder to keep the thread focused on paternity testing relevant to fatherhood. There are plenty of other issues surrounding fatherhood and they are valid topics and threads are available, for free, to discuss them. Thanks.

[amaysngrace]

Courts in the US tend to be unjustifiably biased towards women when it comes to child custody and support. I guess the men in many of those cases are to blame for not standing up for themselves.

 

My exH actually pays more in child support than is required by law. When we were getting divorced he asked me how much did I realistically need, I told him and that's what he pays.

 

We both had lawyers too.

 

Nice guy one would think right? We divorced because he was physically and emotionally abusive.

 

I have full custody which he never even contested. And he never doubted that they are his children either.

 

Being married makes a person grow up and it makes it easier to know what's up when you're speaking from experience rather than just speculating on how things seem to be.

 

My exH didn't fight for custody because I am the one who cared enough to take them out of a broken home. And he was the main one who broke it.

 

Still he didn't ask for a paternity test. Knowing him that, as well as the extra money he pays, was done on the advice of his MALE attorney.

[Woggle]

Hey, Wogs, if your wife walked up to you today and demanded you get a full STD panel because she read on the internet that some men have unprotected sex with hookers and she needed some peace of mind, just in case, how would you feel? You have nothing to hide, right?

 

If she wanted an STD test before marriage sure I would get one and I did get tested after my first divorce with the amount of men she cheated with and I was clean.

 

I probably would not ask for one and I understand why a woman would resent it but I also understand why many men would want one. This kind of subject inspires a visceral knee jerk reaction on the part of most men because it pushes some strong buttons in a man.

[ASG]

If she wanted an STD test before marriage sure I would get one and I did get tested after my first divorce with the amount of men she cheated with and I was clean.

 

I probably would not ask for one and I understand why a woman would resent it but I also understand why many men would want one. This kind of subject inspires a visceral knee jerk reaction on the part of most men because it pushes some strong buttons in a man.

 

I can understand asking for one if you're not in a serious relationship with the person. I once had a pregnancy scare (turns out it was just stress) and I wasn't too sure who the father could have been, even if the odds "favoured" one of them. They were just FWBs and there was no exclusivity.

 

But within a serious committed relationship how can anyone say that it is understandable?

If you suspect your SO of cheating, then that should be addressed before trying to have a child. If you can't trust your SO for whatever reason, then I have to ask why you're in a relationship...

 

I had never even come across anyone that thought it was reasonable to make this request in these circumstances, so hopefully, it is as rare as I think it is...

[xxoo]

If trust your wife, then no paternity test.

If not trust your wife, then paternity test.

[Woggle]

I can understand asking for one if you're not in a serious relationship with the person. I once had a pregnancy scare (turns out it was just stress) and I wasn't too sure who the father could have been, even if the odds "favoured" one of them. They were just FWBs and there was no exclusivity.

 

But within a serious committed relationship how can anyone say that it is understandable?

If you suspect your SO of cheating, then that should be addressed before trying to have a child. If you can't trust your SO for whatever reason, then I have to ask why you're in a relationship...

 

I had never even come across anyone that thought it was reasonable to make this request in these circumstances, so hopefully, it is as rare as I think it is...

 

Having been there I sympathize with men who have trust issues. Not saying that I think it is a healthy or a good thing but men who think like that honestly think they are just protecting themselves and if a woman is trustworthy she should have no reason to object. This is not a good way to think but I have sympathy for those who have trust issues.

[USMCHokie]

If you suspect your SO of cheating, then that should be addressed before trying to have a child. If you can't trust your SO for whatever reason, then I have to ask why you're in a relationship...

 

A lot of cheaters do it with the intention of not getting caught. You make an aggressive assumption in thinking that if a SO does not show signs or arouse suspicion of cheating, then they must not be cheating.