Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes they do. When you make a radical change in the law, you should consider all of its implications.
Uhm, yes you would. You can't test paternity without the man's participation. Mandatory testing means people who don't want to be tested will be forced to. And though you are a man, I don't think you are in a position to speak for all of them. My husband certainly would balk at submitting a tissue sample for a non-medical reason.
Sure, you consider the implications... but the implications of such a situation being discovered need to be addressed.
I would be willing to bet everything I have that if you weren't in the room giving your husband the stink eye, threatening divorce or some other potential consequence that he wouldn't care. And please... stop trying to make it sound like it's a biopsy or some incredibly invasive procedure... it's not. It's a (literally) 2-second procedure of sticking a q-tip in your mouth. Nor is it a non-medical reason... knowing the true biological father is a medical reason. Genetics and family history play a huge role in providing the proper care for a person.
Unnecessary, since Diane knows who the father is. But, she can't be forced to name him Jack will pay. To bad for him I guess, he bought into the misguided lack of trust argument and did not seek a test at birth and is now on the hook. That is the situation today.
Yes, I understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqoica123
i think in general people do not want to be held accountable for their actions if they can get away with it (notice I said people). However, the law will demand men pay child support for their children after DNA has established the facts (a good thing). The law however will punish a man for not asking for a paternity test at birth (trusting your wife can have consequences). So I guess too bad such men.
Other possibilities have been presented.
Don't sleep around.
Don't marry someone whom you suspect will cheat on you.
When you're dating, tell your girlfriend that it's nothing personal, but you will require a paternity test if she bears your child.
But how will you know for SURE that she won't cheat on you? How will you KNOW? Surely there's some way to guarantee a woman won't cheat on you, right?
No, there isn't. You won't know. She won't know whether you're out banging your secretary, either. This is what marriage is. It's a scary thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cqoica123
I am curious though, what would you say to Diane if she was your friend?
I think we left Diane as the wild wife who had sex with 20 men, including her coworkers. She wouldn't be my friend.
Okay. Diane had an affair with a coworker but refuses to say who for whatever reason. Who's going to pay the child support? Not Jack, he's angry. The state wants to know where to send the bill. Better get in line to submit your DNA, so they know you're not Johnny's dad.
Hi JustJulia,
What is with the false dichotomies today? There is no need for a mass database. The mother would be on the hook to identify the father. Its know as a paternity suit. In this case the judge my order the test.
The parents, not the bystander, are responsible. Yes it is easier to identify the mother. Too bad. Then again she has the right to abort while the father does not. You can't make what isn't equal, equal.
Don't marry someone whom you suspect will cheat on you.
When you're dating, tell your girlfriend that it's nothing personal, but you will require a paternity test if she bears your child.
But how will you know for SURE that she won't cheat on you? How will you KNOW? Surely there's some way to guarantee a woman won't cheat on you, right?
No, there isn't. You won't know. She won't know whether you're out banging your secretary, either. This is what marriage is. It's a scary thing.
I think we left Diane as the wild wife who had sex with 20 men, including her coworkers. She wouldn't be my friend.
Since you dodged my question I will ask another one that may be easier for you to answer. What would you tell Jack if he was your friend?
Actually, many men have already heeded your advice and just don't get married anymore, that way the paternity test issue is less complicated. Others even go as far as getting vasectomies
Some states are starting to change the laws to allow for some relief for men like Jack, however, many women's organizations oppose it using the best interests of the child argument. That is a debate for another day.
Funny, I say the same thing to men who want to get out of child support and say things like, "But we used a condom," "But I told her I don't want a kid," and "But she said she'd get an abortion--why is it legal for her to change her mind?"
So do I actually. I don't know why you might think I'm the type of man who thinks fathers should not support their children, no matter the circumstances of their conception. Sure, there are women who do devious things to get pregnant, but if you are the father, you are the father. Man the hell up.
Quote:
A subpoena shows up at your house. A woman claims you are the father of her child, but you never slept with her. Maybe you don't even know her. This is due to a mistake, a prank, the cruel machinations of a disturbed woman, whatever. You can't prove you didn't sleep with her, so you have to be tested or go to jail. Worse, your wife is angry and doesn't believe that you never slept with the other woman (you still can't prove you didn't), and so she files for divorce.
I would never be in that situation, so I don't know what to say about that. I would never be in that situation because I have never done anything to place myself in that situation.
The cost of the support of the child must be equal between the parents. So, if the child's daycare costs $2000 per month, and his food is another $200 a month, and his clothes are another $50 a month, clearly, it would be unfair to require one parent to pay only $500 per month and the other to shoulder the rest. Which is what is happening now.
Why does the child need daycare? Is it because the mother is off working or doing whatever it is she does, while the "non-custodial" parent who might, just might, be available, is not allowed to take care of his child?
What I find amusing is how most of the women here instinctively circle the wagons and rationalize with a noble front the base instincts of a female's equivalent to male harems. The denials just prove the point. They don't even know their sense of justice is just taping the hard wire. What a coincidence, not.
This picture has lately acquired some blemishes. To begin with, birds are no longer such uplifting role models. Using DNA fingerprinting, ornithologists can now check to see if a mother bird's mate really is the father of her offspring. It turns out that some female chickadees (as in "my little chickadee") indulge in extramarital trysts with males that outrank their mates in the social hierarchy. For female barn swallows, it's a male with a long tail that makes extracurriculars irresistible. The innocent-looking indigo bunting has a cuckoldry rate of 40%. And so on. The idea that most bird species are truly monogamous has gone from conventional wisdom to punctured myth in a few short years. As a result, the fidelity of other pair-bonding species has fallen under suspicion.
No, the guy who didn't, got charged with exposing himself when two women trespassed on his acreage.
I'm always amused at how women, who have no concern about who's kid it is, are shocked, yes shocked, that men might like the same certainty. Especially since it is nearly always the men who are on the hook for a near lifetime of payments, whether married or divorced.
Its also good for the child to know who their biological father is. Genetic treatments being what they already are and considering what they will be in only a few years, this information is really owed to every child.
If women don't like this, DON'T SLEEP AROUND! You've been telling men this for a long time. Time to set an example and offer some proof.
[mod cut]
The point about the rights of the children really trumps that of a "wife" trying to cover up her infidelity.
First, can you imagine a woman trying, decades later to remember all the men she was screwing around with, so her now adult child could identiify the real father. Better to do this at the time and cover up the full extent of this.
Secondly, if men are going to screw around with married women, it should not only be the woman's responsibility when this is uncovered. Child support should be mandatory when a man cuckolds another man. Perhaps this will finally get this epidemic under control. At the moment, players know that the lowest risk is screwing another mans wife since he will never have to pay. Time for a change!
Last edited by mrstewart; 04-09-2010 at 04:55 PM..
Reason: personal attack
Why does the child need daycare? Is it because the mother is off working or doing whatever it is she does, while the "non-custodial" parent who might, just might, be available, is not allowed to take care of his child?
I find it fascinating how certain men here complain about women living at men's expense and simultaneously diss women who work. Yes, the child needs daycare because the mother is working. And the father is working. If the father wants to contribute labor instead of funds, I suppose that's fine, provided it isn't more expensive than adequate commercial daycare.
What I find amusing is how most of the women here instinctively circle the wagons and rationalize with a noble front the base instincts of a female's equivalent to male harems. The denials just prove the point. They don't even know their sense of justice is just taping the hard wire. What a coincidence, not.
This picture has lately acquired some blemishes. To begin with, birds are no longer such uplifting role models. Using DNA fingerprinting, ornithologists can now check to see if a mother bird's mate really is the father of her offspring. It turns out that some female chickadees (as in "my little chickadee") indulge in extramarital trysts with males that outrank their mates in the social hierarchy. For female barn swallows, it's a male with a long tail that makes extracurriculars irresistible. The innocent-looking indigo bunting has a cuckoldry rate of 40%. And so on. The idea that most bird species are truly monogamous has gone from conventional wisdom to punctured myth in a few short years. As a result, the fidelity of other pair-bonding species has fallen under suspicion.
That's totally unscientific nonsense. Just because a certain animal does X doesn't explain or "prove" anything about the behavior of individual humans. Moreover, it's rather rich of you to complain about "tricks" when you try to pull that whole "denying proves it" nonsense. I suppose if you deny molesting little boys, that only proves that you do it -- you know, given men's base nature and all. [/end sarcasm]
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.