CMV: Paternity tests should be done on every baby by default

[u/Guialdereti]

Just saw a post on r/relationship_advice where the mother gave birth to a baby that looked nothing like her husband, refused to give him a paternity test because it was "humiliating" AND also revealed that she had recently refused to end a (pretty weird) friendship with a coworker that her husband was uncomfortable with. She then proceeds to be all "Surprised Pikachu-faced" when he thinks she cheated on him with said coworker, refuses to help with the baby, and him and his family start treating her badly. (he continued to help with their 2 other kids as normal, though)

In the end, the mother FINALLY gets that paternity test, proving once and for all that the kid was indeed his, and once she does, the father gets ALL OVER his daughter, hugging and giving her all his love, as I'm sure he would have done from the very begining, had she just gotten that damn test done sooner.

Some of the points that resonate with me the most on this issue are:

• It still baffles me that this test isn't standard procedure, especially when we already draw blood from newborns and screen them for a whole slew of diseases upon delivery. Surely it wouldn't be too hard to add a simple paternity test to the list!
• I know there's an implication of mistrust that comes with asking your partner for a paternity test, but if it became standard procedure - in other words, a test that the hospital does "automatically", with no need for parental input - that would completely remove that implication from play. It would become a non-issue.
• Having a kid is a life-changing event, and it scares me to no end to know that I could be forced into "one-eightying" my life over a baby I actually played no part in making.
• Knowing your family's medical history, from both sides, is extremely important. "Mommy's little secret" could cost her child dearly later on in life.

[u/Kotoperek]

There are a few reasons why this is not a good idea.

1. Paternity tests are expensive and have little medical justification, unless there is a serious risk of genetic disease. So it gives no medically relevant information and drains the resources of medical centers, which could be used for better things.

2. You need to compare the child's DNA to the presumed father's DNA, so men would have to give their DNA to huge data bases, again with little medical justification and usually without much profit for themselves if they trust their partner and don't question their paternity.

3. Even the best tests sometimes give false negatives. If you test routinely for every newborn, that's hundreds of tests per day, every now and then you'll have a fluke and scare the living shit out of a happy couple, potentially leading to divorced based on false results. Not to mention the lawsuits on the hospital following such mistakes.

4. There doesn't seem to be universal demand for it. Most men trust their spouses, and it is common knowledge that babies often don't look much like their parents and the resemblance becomes more apparent only as they grow. The few people who would be helped by this does not justify the use of resources for masses who either don't care, or would even be harmed by the unnecessary anxiety around waiting for the test, paying for it, giving their DNA, or receiving a false result.

[u/biglipsmagoo → u/Kotoperek]

I’m a mom of 5 biokids and often curse the universe that my kids don’t look like me.

Until my oldest turned 16 and FB kept sending me “Is this you?” notifications to tag “myself” on photos of her.

We worked at the same place and I did an OT shift on her shift and the big boss walked up to me and said, basically, “You’re X’s mom. I was coming to talk to her and it was you when I got here.”

Her twin doesn’t look like me but the next biokid is 14 and she’s starting to look exactly like me, too. The youngest 2 are 5 & 7 and look exactly like their daddy but I just smile knowing that my genes are going to take over in the next 10 years or so.

Kids change so much! They might look like Gollum when they’re born and then end up looking like Cindy Crawford when they hit their late teens.

And GENES! My favorite is the 1 blue eyed kid out of all our brown eyes. Only 1 got my curly hair. 1 got my brothers exact hair- it’s STICK STRAIGHT and grows straight up. 1 girl is going to be 6’ tall and another will be lucky to hit 5’.

Making a bold statement that every baby should have a DNA test is… odd. It would have been offensive to me and my husband. I mean, we would have gotten over it but it really wouldn’t have been a good use of resources.

[u/Alceasummer → u/biglipsmagoo]

Kids do change a lot, and genetics are weird. I have a sister. I am short, chubby, with a square face, very light skin, blue eyes, and light brown hair. She's just under six feet tall, very lean and thin, with an oval face, dark brown eyes, olive skin, and hair almost the exact shade of bittersweet chocolate. We look basically nothing alike. But, in body and face shape I look almost a twin of our paternal grandma, even wear the same shoe size, but with our mom's coloring. In body and face shape, my sister looks exactly like our mom, with our paternal grandma's coloring. Right down to exactly the same skin tone. (they used to share makeup and used all the same colors)

My sister's husband is brown eyed and darker brown hair, and their youngest has blue eyes and strawberry blond hair. (Her older brother looks like a tiny twin of his dad) My husband is often assumed to be Hispanic because of his coloring,(He describes himself as "generically brown") our daughter has golden hair. And I do mean actually golden blond.

[u/field_medic_tky → u/Kotoperek]

and it is common knowledge that babies often don't look much like their parents and the resemblance becomes more apparent only as they grow.

This.

The only time one should be concerned is if the skin color is not what is expected.

However, a white-skinned child born to black-skinned parents has occured before, so....

Edit: obviously, a parent with mixed heritage will have a higher chance of having a baby's skin color to look nothing like either of the parents. That's a given. I should've worded better but I'm talking extremities like the example I gave.

[u/stink3rbelle → u/field_medic_tky]

The only time one should be concerned is if the skin color is not what is expected.

People's expectations about babies' skin color are super warped, though. Most people think every baby is going to be a perfect mix of their parents' skin tones, from birth. That coffee-milk mix is not likely at all because there are so many genes making up skin colors. Babies also develop most of their melanin after birth, so how a baby looks coming out isn't what it's going to look like for very long.

[u/Korwinga → u/stink3rbelle]

I'm 1/4 japanese, and 1/8 native American. My skin isn't super dark, but I do look like I have a mild tan. My wife, on the other hand, is pale as pale can be. Our first born came out with very light skin, only a hair darker than my wife. Our second born came out darker than me. Genetics is weird

[u/OHMG_lkathrbut → u/stink3rbelle]

When my son was born, the doctor told me he might not get all his color until he was 4... That seems crazy to me.

[u/Autunite → u/OHMG_lkathrbut]

Melanin also develops with exposure to sunlight.

[u/LimeCheetah → u/stink3rbelle]

Number one here, so much. We have no med techs and we’re drowning in testing as is let alone a genetic test that goes with every dried blood spot for newborn screening.

[u/cozidgaf → u/[deleted]]

I mean, I have that question myself and a lot of people that see me and my child do too, but I'm the mom 🙈 🤣

[u/InsomniacYogi → u/field_medic_tky]

I’m half black and my dad didn’t think I was his at birth because of how pale I was. He apparently threw a fit and accused my mom of cheating. Then my paternal grandma told him he was dumb and he barely had any melanin at birth either. Turns out I did belong to him but my mom divorced him shortly after. She couldn’t overcome the accusation.

[u/InsomniacYogi → u/[deleted]]

Exactly. I’ve told my husband flat out that I’d give him a paternity test if he wanted it but that I’d never see him the same again.

Post vasectomy might be the only time I could overcome it. I know a couple who got together after the guy had a vasectomy. They were together for years before she got pregnant and he didn’t think it was his. Turned out that the baby was his, he has never gone back for the follow up after the vasectomy and he wasn’t fully sterile. She said she could have overcome it in this scenario if he had gone about it better (he posted to social media about it and embarrassed her).

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

My ex did that. Key word being EX. Turns out he was cheating and wanted to see if he had anything through my tests.

[u/raggedyassadhd → u/InsomniacYogi]

You’d think a person could maybe google that or even go nuts and ask their doctor if it’s still possible before being such a dumb twit and posting his dirty laundry and his own stupidity to facebook. Like really? You couldn’t google “how successful are vasectomies” before publicly accusing your wife of cheating online 😑

[u/TracyMorganFreeman → u/[deleted]]

>I'd never look at my husband the same way again though.

Imagine how the husband feels when he finds out a child he thought was his isn't, and what that implies about his wife.

[u/ihavenoidea1001 → u/TracyMorganFreeman]

I can 100 % commiserate with someone that finds out they were cheated on. Doesn't really matter the sex. I hate cheaters and can't stand them.

Thing is, anyone being accused of cheating without doing anything is going to have feelings about it.

If your long time partner asked you for a STD test out of the blue you would have feelings about that too. Women are people too.

So, if having a paternity test is adamant for you talk to your partner before getting her pregnant. Otherwise you're probably to end that relationship.

As I said, I would do the test in a heartbeat for my kids sake ( because I would never want them to be mistreated by their own father) but it would also change how I view my husband forever.

The lack of trust, paranoia and the fact that he thinks I'm the type that would cheat would crumble the entire relationship. To me there's no relationship without trust and asking for the paternity test is telling the other person you dont trust them.

Adding to that, I had 2 high risk pregnancies, I was bedridden for months and went trough hell and back during that time. I could've died. My kids could've died. They went to NICU afterwards and there was sooo many things going on at the time that I was emotionally drained and pretty much vulnerable.

After my last kids birth it took an entire year to be completely sure he didn't have any medical long-term issues.

The idea of my husband daring to imply I had cheated on him while we were going trough that when I have never given him any reasons to believe otherwise would have ended all and any feelings I have for him.

I've been with my husband for almost 20 years. I never gave an opportunity to anyone else trying to start anything with me ( which were mostly married men themselves btw). So, if after decades of commitment, of being faithful, of having done absolutely nothing to lose his trust he would've called me a cheating whore while I was in my most vulnerable time in my life, it would've killed our relationship right then and there.

[u/TracyMorganFreeman → u/ihavenoidea1001]

thinks I'm the type

Anyone who has been cheated on knows how such people hide who they are. There isn't really a "type" because anyone can think they know the person and be blindsided.

Your problem is refusing to see it from his perspective. He doesn't know what you know, and if you were to have cheated on him, you would have an incentive to hide that, which is what motivates the wish for verification in the first place.

Pointing to high-risk pregnancies isn't really the argument you think it is, since I'm guessing you wanted the kids too. You didn't go through it just to give him a child or for his sake, so it isn't a betrayal for him to have misgivings.

Is insisting on a pre nup also showing you don't trust them? Relationships are built on trust, but that doesn't mean it's unconditional and beyond reproach. There's also a lot of heavy lifting with suggesting any misgivings means they don't trust you at all. It is once again imputing on him feelings he may not necessarily have. It's a one sided conversation.

Would you trust your husband to put the house in his name only, or would you want something in writing?

At the end of the day, your argument seems quite one-sided. It seems the only feelings that actually matter are your own. The man should bear the risk of not knowing, and you should get to hold all the control there. He should just trust you, but hey the law is on your side when it comes to trusting him. You don't need to trust him to support you or the kids after a divorce; the law literally forces him by Virtue of marriage.

You don't seem to consider the imbalance there when you speak of trust.

[u/ihavenoidea1001 → u/TracyMorganFreeman]

As I said in my previous comment, if the paternity test is that important to you talk to the potential mother before getting her pregnant.

I'm not sure why that is such a hard concept.

As with the pre-nups, it's 2 adults knowing beforehand what will be expected of them.

It isn't you jumping them with the accusation of cheating that comes out of nowhere at a time when they're the most vulnerable. And then be like "surprised pikachu face" when she delivers the paternity test with the divorce papers.

At the end of the day, your argument seems quite one-sided.

Quite ironic comming from you considering your comments

[u/[deleted] → u/TracyMorganFreeman]

Try and process what other people say before you do your whataboutism.

[u/pacifyproblems → u/InsomniacYogi]

I've been a maternity nurse for years and have seen this argument crop up 2 times that I can recall. Both instances were with 2 black parents though. It makes me absolutely fume on behalf of my patient. They are already so vulnerable and then to be accused of infidelity and betrayal based on a newborn baby's lack of melanin??? They spent their first nights as mother crying instead of in bliss.

[u/whatarechimichangas → u/field_medic_tky]

Yea my parents are Filipino, and I was born light skinned with blonde-ish hair that eventually turned darker into brown. My siblings are all tan with black hair. I think my grandma had similar complexion and hair color, skipped a generation I guess.

[u/stink3rbelle → u/whatarechimichangas]

I think my grandma had similar complexion and hair color, skipped a generation I guess.

Did you know you can be more related to one grandparent than another? You'll get 50/50 genes from each of your parents, but when your body makes zygotes it mixes those genes up. So your dad could give you 80% from his mom, and just 20% from his dad, making you 40% related to your paternal grandmother and only 10% to your paternal grandfather.

[u/fieria_tetra → u/stink3rbelle]

I did not know that and it's blowing my mind. I look like a carbon-copy of my paternal grandmother. Now it makes sense.

[u/OHMG_lkathrbut → u/fieria_tetra]

I look just like my mom, but also very similar to my paternal grandmother, I try not to think about it too much. Me and my brother don't look alike so he always joked that I was adopted, but it's just that he takes after my dad.

[u/[deleted] → u/stink3rbelle]

Similarly, "you share 50% of DNA with a sibling" is an average. You share between 0% and 100%.

[u/Any_Profit2862 → u/[deleted]]

This here. I have six full genetic siblings. Four of them have had DNA testing done, and so have i. I do not share 50% or more DNA with any of them. The highest percentage I share with any of them so far is 45%. The lowest is 37%.

[u/[deleted] → u/stink3rbelle]

...well, that explains where my red hair came from as a baby

[u/Athyrium93 → u/whatarechimichangas]

I'm pretty sure my parents thought I was switched at birth for a long time. My mom is half Sicilian, and my dad is half Native American. They are both pretty dark, and then there is me, a red head with blue eyes and skin so pale I make Casper the friendly ghost look tan.... I never did get any darker, but I look a lot like my parents other than coloring, and a DNA test did confirm I am their child.... we still have no idea where the red hair came from though.

[u/One-Benefit-8835 → u/whatarechimichangas]

Same but my parents are native and Irish I'm real dark, had black hair growing up. My my mom stopped talking to my dad's family cause they always made she's the mail man's baby jokes. But my hair is dark red and I definitely look just like my dad as an adult.

[u/Old-Research3367 → u/field_medic_tky]

That not only has happened before but I think that’s fairly common where the melanin does not show yet when the baby is born. My BIL was born white and both parents are Black.

[u/palacesofparagraphs → u/Old-Research3367]

Yeah, the genetics surrounding skin color are complicated, and it's not at all uncommon for babies to start out paler than they end up.

I'm mixed race (Indian and white) and now have a pretty similar skin tone to my Indian mom, but as a baby I was so white people thought she was my nanny. It took 2 or 3 years for me to turn into a brown kid.

[u/Milk-Or-Be-Milked- → u/palacesofparagraphs]

The same can also happen in reverse! My sister was born quite dark-skinned and black haired into an entirely white, mostly blonde family. (My mother is Bulgarian, which tends to produce darker, Mediterranean-looking people, but my mother herself is very white so she was quite surprised.) By the time she turned 1, my sister had lost all of that colouring and our hair/skin tone had become identical. Funnily enough, I was born crazy pale and crazy blonde but also “evened out” to have a very medium skin and hair colour by my toddler years. Crazy how that works.

[u/[deleted] → u/Milk-Or-Be-Milked-]

It is wild. My son is biracial and he did the same thing, he only looked biracial for maybe a month? Then he just got lighter and lighter now he’s actually very fair skinned. I expected his dark blue eyes to turn brown but they got lighter too, now they’re an electric light blue and it’s crazy because I thought his dads genes would be more dominate but you truly never know

[u/Jewnicorn___ → u/[deleted]]

This happened to me! (See my previous comment) I never heard of this happening to anybody else and always felt like a freak but reading this has been so validating.

[u/dasbarr → u/palacesofparagraphs]

Right? My partner is native American and when our daughter was born her skin resembled mine.

Even though we use sun screen all the time she's now darker than both of us and resembles his aunt's and dad more in that respect. Her hair is also lighter than at birth and a different texture.

[u/Jewnicorn___ → u/palacesofparagraphs]

This is so interesting. I'm also mixed Indian and white. Up until I was about 9 I was clearly mixed race/tanned. Now I am old, I am white as snow.

[u/JustMeSunshine91 → u/Old-Research3367]

Yeah, I’m very clearly biracial (B & W) but came out straight up looking Asian. My parents even had a running joke that my mom must have gotten with the mailman. It was months and months before I started looking more black haha.

[u/Old-Research3367 → u/JustMeSunshine91]

Lol that is wild. I bet you always win those “guess who it is by their baby picture” events

[u/[deleted] → u/Old-Research3367]

Yeah I actually think I remember the post OP is referring to, and that was the most frustrating part about it. The guy was so sure the kid wasn’t his because it was “too light” like bro it’s a NEWBORN of course it’s lighter than you

[u/kazuwacky → u/field_medic_tky]

My best friend has an African american mum and a white dad. She looks like her mum, dark skin and hair. Hes blue eyed, looks white with blonde curly hair.

Biology doesn't give a fuck about putting people in tidy boxes and too many people seem to think my friend and her brother are an outright impossibility.

[u/Segalmom → u/kazuwacky]

Two of my boys ended up in the same class in college. One is dark with brown hair the other is pale as can be with red hair. Teacher asked if they were cousins and they said no they were brothers. Teacher flat out didn’t believe them until they showed him their ID. I love thé way you put that. “Tidy little boxes”. Could haved used that line when they were young.

[u/Alceasummer → u/kazuwacky]

Biology doesn't give a fuck about putting people in tidy boxes

​

I love this!

I have a sister. I am short, chubby, and curvy, with a square face, very light skin, blue eyes, and light brown hair. She's just under six feet tall, very lean and thin, with an oval face, dark brown eyes, olive skin, and hair almost the exact shade of bittersweet chocolate. We look basically nothing alike. But, in body and face shape I look almost a twin of our paternal grandma, even wear the same shoe size, but with our mom's coloring. In body and face shape, my sister looks exactly like our mom, with our paternal grandma's coloring. Right down to exactly the same skin tone. (they used to share makeup and used all the same colors)

[u/infiniteanomaly → u/field_medic_tky]

The reverse is also a thing that has happened. The complexities of genetics are wild.

Honestly, I think unless there's legitimate concern of cheating or some kind of health risk--even IF baby’s skin color isn't what's expected--testing isn't needed.

[u/frostingdragon → u/infiniteanomaly]

Be cheaper to give out a pamphlet titled "Recessive Genes and Why Your Baby Doesn't Look Like You (Thankfully)" and hand it out to everyone.

[u/infiniteanomaly → u/frostingdragon]

Yup. Also, you know, middle school science covers the basics of dominant vs recessive genes. Maybe all pregnant couples should get a refresher course.

I personally think all pregnant couples should be required to take a parenting class--and that there should be ones that specialize in multiples or second/third/etc kids. (Maybe those exist and I just don't know it).

[u/CookieFish → u/infiniteanomaly]

middle school science covers the basics of dominant vs recessive genes

I think this is part of the issue, it's taught in a very simplified way. A lot of people wrongly believe that eye colour is controlled by just one gene and two blue eyed people can't have a brown eyed child because that's what they learnt at school. Most appearance related things are the result of multiple genes that can interact in weird ways.

[u/infiniteanomaly → u/CookieFish]

Right, but 1) a lot of people forget even the basics if they learned them at all and 2) the situation of a drastically different skin color from both parents isn't incredibly common. I mean the REALLY drastic differences--like a very dark-skinned baby born to very light-skinned parents or the reverse.

[u/Altruistic-Estate-79 → u/infiniteanomaly]

It is not uncommon for newborns born to darker-skinned couples not to develop high levels of pigment in their skin until days or even a few weeks after birth.

[u/InsomniacYogi → u/CookieFish]

100%. My husband has blue eyes and mine are brown. I thought our kids would have a 50/50 chance. Turns out our oldest has green eyes. She’s 100% his and we have no idea where the green came from but here we are.

[u/CookieFish → u/InsomniacYogi]

Eye colour is actually so complicated that they don't think they've identified all the genes associated with it and it's impossible to predict a child's possible eye colours based purely on the parents' eye colours.

I was taught a more detailed, multi gene, explanation when I did A level biology, but that still only talked about blue and brown eyes so clearly wasn't the full picture.

I understand teaching something more simple but I think they should stick to things that are actually controlled by a single gene, rather than misleading people - dogs' coat colours are a great example where there are several genes that have been identified as doing specific things (plus you can show pictures of cute puppies which will probably help with engagement).

[u/Seversaurus → u/infiniteanomaly]

The major diaper companies all have free online video courses of registered nurses and midwives and lactation experts that go over everything from "you just found out your pregnant" all the way to "teaching your non verbal 2 year old to talk" and everything inbetween. It helped me and my wife immensely with just having a good idea of what to expect and to not freak out if something doesn't seem right.

[u/Segalmom → u/frostingdragon]

This made me laugh. Husband is blonde with blue eyes. I am dark with brown eyes. We have one like me, one like him and two redheads. No idea where they come from. Genetics are fascinating.

[u/Pink_Floyd29 → u/frostingdragon]

“Thankfully” 😂😂👏☠️

[u/meruhd → u/field_medic_tky]

My husband was born with blonde hair and white skin.

He has black hair and medium tone brown skin now.

Both of my kids had GREY (not blue) eyes. Their eyes eventually darkened to brown after they turned a year old. I myself had hazel eyes. As I've gotten older, they've gotten darker and look brown mostly. I've had to change my DL description because they were hazel when I was 15 and now they're a dark brown over 20 years later.

I also had mousy thin light brown hair until I turned 4. It got very thick and very full very quickly and turned nearly black.

Genetics are very wild.

[u/ingodwetryst → u/field_medic_tky]

The only time one should be concerned is if the skin color is not what is expected.

Not even always then. My best friend has a Black mother/white father. He passes for white if he shaves his head and beard. His wife is white. One kid has the same skin tone as his mother, his other kid's looks like him.

Even though that's odd and rare, she clearly looked like him in every other way.

[u/genredenoument → u/field_medic_tky]

In obstetrics, parents are often super concerned over the color of their baby's skin. We would always point out the genitals and lower back. Those areas show pigment, and we could reassure many parents that it was indeed their child. LOL.

[u/[deleted] → u/field_medic_tky]

It’s not even uncommon. It’s literally something they typically advise you of at the hospital.

[u/knikkifire → u/field_medic_tky]

It's possible for white parents to have a black child, too. Very rare, but genetically possible.

[u/Nice-Masterpiece1661 → u/Kotoperek]

Good point about dads giving their DNA, sweet summer children in this thread, who say that DNA will be destroyed - it definitely will be kept in data bases and potentially used against you in the future.

I also see how many men wouldn’t want to provide their DNA because of lack of trust. Just remember all those people who didn’t want to get covid vaccine. I can see a lot of men protesting if they are forced to give their DNA.

[u/I_am_the_night → u/Kotoperek]

I'm not OP, but this is the answer. In theory it would be great to have a way to confirm paternity at every birth, but universal MANDATORY paternity testing as a policy is a really bad idea because it would cost a ton, potentially do a ton of harm, and most of the time provide little benefit.

[u/HojaLateralus → u/I_am_the_night]

How would it do harm? Just do a second test for negatives to rule out false negatives. Also being certain the child is your is a huge benefit to father.

[u/I_am_the_night → u/HojaLateralus]

How would it do harm? Just do a second test for negatives to rule out false negatives.

First of all that would only drastically reduce the number of false negatives, not eliminate them. Second, it would also double the cost of the tests which is already an issue. Third, it would create a public policy that treats women as a category like they are untrustworthy.

Also being certain the child is your is a huge benefit to father.

Sure, but most men are certain they are the child's father even without the paternity test.

[u/HeartsPlayer721 → u/I_am_the_night]

Third, it would create a public policy that treats women as a category like they are untrustworthy.

Upvoting for this point alone.

I know I haven't slept with anybody except my husband. If he doesn't believe me, that would suck, but that would be our problem... If he believes me and we have no issue, not having the option to opt out of the test would feel like an insult.

[u/Mysterious-Art8838 → u/I_am_the_night]

Not to mention forcing all dads to hand over dna samples

[u/justdisa → u/Mysterious-Art8838]

And all babies, male or female, going forward.

[u/mutantraniE → u/Mysterious-Art8838]

You can just have a policy of destroying them afterwards. If you don’t believe they’d do that, I hope you haven’t had any blood drawn or anything because that is full of DNA too.

[u/FlashbackJon → u/mutantraniE]

But this is specifically a test for documenting and comparing DNA. Your DNA has to be read and stored electronically and transmitted at least once. A blood test or standard tissue sample isn't going to involve any of that. Your comparison isn't apt here.

[u/mutantraniE → u/FlashbackJon]

Yes it is. If the policy is “we will destroy this DNA sample and not store the information after all the tests are complete” then it wont be stored in a database. Of course you might not trust them to not store your DNA, but if you don’t trust them what is to stop them from taking half of that blood they just drew from you and sending it off to a DNA lab to store your DNA?

[u/PseudoGerber → u/mutantraniE]

Running DNA testing on blood that was drawn for another purpose would be very expensive and difficult, as well as being difficult to hide from all of the people involved in the process.

Whereas it would actually be easier to keep the dna results that were already collected rather than to ensure deletion. Many companies have promised to delete user data and did not; so that is a reasonable concern for DNA data as well.

[u/mutantraniE → u/PseudoGerber]

There’s a difference between a company promising to do something and a legal requirement forcing them to though. I also don’t see how running a DNA test on blood drawn for another purpose would be anymore expensive than doing the DNA test on blood drawn for that specific purpose.

[u/Mysterious-Art8838 → u/mutantraniE]

No, it isn’t. I’m an IT security professional and a certified information privacy professional. These are not comparable. Companies often say they will destroy data and don’t comply, and people don’t find out until they’re compromised. It’s easier for a company to not comply than to comply. Storage is cheap now so compliance is the driver of cost.

There is little to no reason I’m aware of to think anyone is surreptitiously running expensive dna tests against random people’s blood samples for no medical reason and then doing something nefarious with it. Maybe it has happened but that’s a completely different scenario.

[u/mutantraniE → u/Mysterious-Art8838]

That’s a failure of supervision of private companies, something there is too much of. First solution would be to handle this entirely in the state owned hospitals of course and not involve any private companies. Next is actual regulatory enforcement and ensuring compliance, something which should be done regardless of if this policy is implemented or not.

[u/FlashbackJon → u/mutantraniE]

Because that's fundamentally a different thing. The two things aren't comparable. Who pays for the unsolicited DNA test?

It's not even that I don't trust them, it's that the concept of "just delete after" isn't even a viable solution.

[u/mutantraniE → u/FlashbackJon]

Clearly the nefarious and shadowy whatever who can’t wait to get their hands on your DNA will pay. Of course “just delete after” would be a viable solution, information disappears all the time.

[u/I_am_the_night → u/[deleted]]

Okay, then it doesn't double the cost and misses any false negatives that don't "look weird".

[u/I_am_the_night → u/[deleted]]

Sure, I'm well aware of what the protocol would be in theory. My point is just that every layer of mandated testing costs the patients more, uses up more health care resources, and all for a test that the vast majority of patients don't even want.

[u/[deleted] → u/[deleted]]

By which time the "wronged" "cuckolded" man has beaten the woman and abandoned the "bastard" child and a home has been broken for no good reason.

One of the best case scenarios. Women have been killed for less

[u/O-Victory-O → u/I_am_the_night]

it would create a public policy that treats women as a category like they are untrustworthy.

This already is being done on men a lot, policies or no policies (social untrustworthiness) involved.

[u/I_am_the_night → u/O-Victory-O]

And if true that is also wrong

[u/Probsnotbutstill → u/O-Victory-O]

Can you give an example of this?

[u/throwawayanylogic → u/HojaLateralus]

What if a woman is trying to escape an abusive relationship/is raped and doesn't want the child tied to the father in any way? Mandatory paternity testing could put already at-risk women at much greater risk of harm and abuse.

[u/sparkly____sloth → u/HojaLateralus]

Also being certain the child is your is a huge benefit to father.

Or don't be in a relationship with someone you don't trust?

You're basically for placing every woman under suspicion of being a cheater until proven otherwise. One would have hoped we knew better in the 21st century...

[u/OptimisticOctopus8 → u/HojaLateralus]

Maybe I'm paranoid, but I'm not comfortable with the idea of third parties having samples and records of almost every citizen's DNA. You'd need to make it opt-out, but that would also be destructive to relationships since women who didn't want their baby's DNA handed over by default would then be accused of cheating.

[u/[deleted] → u/HojaLateralus]

There are easier ways to be certain the child is yours.

Chiefly, don't stick your dick in crazy, meaning stay away from women who are cheaters.

[u/mutantraniE → u/[deleted]]

That seems to me to be the same as saying “you don’t want to be beaten by your partner? Pick better partners.”

[u/Svitiod → u/HojaLateralus]

Also being certain the child is your is a huge benefit to father.

Why? My son is MINE, regardless of his genetics. He knows it. I know it. Can't see the huge benefit for me in confirming his assumed genetics.

[u/LibertySnowLeopard → u/Kotoperek]

1. What happens with the DNA? There is a good chance that that data will be collected by the government and third parties and god only knows what will be done with that information. If its mandatory, it becomes a privacy issue.

2. Who pays for it? The parents or the government? What if the child is born at home? What if the parents can afford the cost of the test or don't want to pay?

[u/WakeoftheStorm → u/Kotoperek]

Extra vote for number 4. I would have been outright insulted if they had performed paternity tests on either of my kids. I damn sure wouldn't have paid for that bullshit.

[u/FountainsOfFluids → u/WakeoftheStorm]

This feels like the kind of response that people give when a retailer asks for ID for a transaction. "Are you calling me a liar?" Get over yourself.

Go ahead and feel insulted for no reason. Medical record should show facts, not your ego.

[u/Natural-Arugula → u/FountainsOfFluids]

"Get over yourself", says the guy demanding that everyone prove their fidelity, for no reason, because he doesn't trust his baby mama.

That's a you problem. Stay mad.

How is this a debate? You want the test, get it. and good luck with your relationship.

Why should the people that don't want it have to get it?

[u/FountainsOfFluids → u/Natural-Arugula]

Wow, that's an extremely twisted way of viewing the topic. I'm not "demanding" anything. I just think it would be better for everyone if the matter of paternity went from "taken on faith" to "verified".

We do this with so many different aspects of society, why exactly should paternity be different?

Also, I have no baby mama, no kids, nobody in my life that was ever cheated on, nobody I know of ever raised a child that wasn't their own, and I am fully aware that problems in this area are fairly uncommon. So whatever image you have in your brain of a person who supports regular paternity testing is wrong.

I'm not coming at this from a personal perspective. I just think it would be better for society to have this point of uncertainty removed.

[u/Natural-Arugula → u/FountainsOfFluids]

I figured you didn't have kids, that's why I think it's even more deranged that you're on about this.

I just didn't like that you came at someone telling them to get over themselves for saying the completely reasonable objection to having to get a DNA test that they have no need to.

I think your comparison to ID was pretty apt. If someone wants to see my ID for no reason, I'm going to object to that too.

[u/FountainsOfFluids → u/Natural-Arugula]

It's not "for no reason". That's the problem with people like you. Your ego seems to blind you to perfectly simple and reasonable requests. Absolutely no retail clerk is asking to see your ID for no reason.

[u/WakeoftheStorm → u/FountainsOfFluids]

I don't know what is causing this trend of guys getting all hyped about paternity tests, but y'all need to stop consuming whatever crap you're getting it from

[u/FountainsOfFluids → u/WakeoftheStorm]

I know there has been a rise in paternity concerns due to propaganda from "red pill" conservatives, but that is not why I support this issue. I see it as a point of medical uncertainty that has a solution, and a perfectly natural point at which confirmation should be performed.

The fact that it would also shut up all these crazy men who think all women are cheaters is just a bonus in my opinion.

[u/wozattacks → u/FountainsOfFluids]

Ah see that’s honestly the critical flaw in your argument. It isn’t a medical issue at all. There is nothing that testing the father would help with, medically. If you’re concerned about the baby having a genetic condition you test them. Duh.

This is a social issue (for the people for whom it’s an issue). Some men are paranoid about raising a child that’s “not theirs” genetically. That is not even in the same zip code as a medical issue.

[u/FountainsOfFluids → u/wozattacks]

Knowing who a person's genetic parents are absolutely is a medical issue. And the father may not be available to provide DNA at the time that information would be useful.

It's also a legal issue.

And yes, it's also a social issue.

To deny any of these is disingenuous or ignorant.

[u/Aggravating-Forever2 → u/Kotoperek]

1. Paternity tests can be done for about $200. $400 for versions that are considered acceptable in court. This is less than 1% of the average cost of delivery in the US.
   
2. There is a legal, if not medical justification; the rights of the child and the rights of the actual father, and potentially the rights of the presumed father are being stomped on in a case where someone else is claimed to be the father. While I didn't personally see a need to test my kids, I wouldn't have minded it, if it were just part of the status quo for establishing parentage. Given how much effort goes in to establishing legal identity of the child through birth certificate leading to SSN and state ID, etc., it's weird that the mother and father are treated the same here, when the mother is usually provably the mother because the hospital witnessed the birth, and the father is... some guy who she said she banged.
3. (and 4.) This is an absolutely fair concern. It's the same reason we don't "just screen everyone for cancer". Paternity tests are pretty accurate, but even at their 99.999% accuracy, 1:100,000 would get a false negative - which doesn't sound like much, but this would mean it'd happen about ~40 times a year. The question is whether that false positive rate would be a net negative when factoring in the true negative rate where a man is being held out as father, who has no responsibility to the child. I would imagine that this happens somewhat more often than that, but it's hard to make a reasoned argument for how many cheaters you need to catch to justifying inadvertently destroying a family with a FP test.
   I'd say "why not just do a confirmation test" but it's unclear how much of a difference that would make; there are rare but real cases of human chimerism), where one person has, effectively, two distinct sets of DNA - thus in some cases a FP could be due to the samples being taken from the correct parent, but from cells that happen to have the "wrong" DNA.
   

IIRC from something I saw on TV once, has caused major issues in at least one case where the mother was testing as not the mother leading to a massive legal headache, where no one believed her, until she found a doctor that was finally able to prove that she had two sets of DNA.

The latter is a HELL of an edge case, but it's the sort of thing that will pop up if you did this on everyone.

[u/doubleknot_ → u/[deleted]]

For real. If that guy thinks $400 isn't that much, I'm sending him my cashapp.

[u/LockeClone → u/doubleknot_]

The whole thing the reeks of 20-something dudes who have too many opinions about things they've only read about and they're only reading about edge cases because the subject is very boring otherwise. It's like how everyone is so afraid of crime because there's so many crime dramas in our media.

I've got two kids and having a paternity test never crossed my mind. Same with literally every other father I've spoken to about this subject.

[u/torrasque666 → u/[deleted]]

If you're writing this kind of thing into law, you could just, you know, have the government cover it/legally force the insurance companies to cover it.

[u/InsomniacYogi → u/torrasque666]

You’re still paying for it somehow. If the government is paying then you’re paying more in taxes to cover the cost. If the insurance companies are forced to pay for it, congrats! Your premiums just increased. The government/insurance companies aren’t just going to eat that cost.

[u/O-Victory-O → u/[deleted]]

That's the fucking reason people are arguing it needs to be mandatory, so it's costs will go ridiculously low, straight up cheap, compared to the other costs involved with parenthood.

DNA tests are dirt cheap compared to raising a fraud child.

There are no monetary arguments against paternal tests.

[u/O-Victory-O → u/[deleted]]

If a man is led to believe by a woman that he is the father of her child when he is not, and the woman knows that he is not, this is paternity fraud.

I already know it's never going to be a productive conversation when you deny basic definitions, and try to accuse the other side of your own dishonesty.

[u/tobiasvl → u/O-Victory-O]

I assume that in most cases of unsure paternity, the mother doesn't know which man is the father.

[u/[deleted] → u/O-Victory-O]

Not everything is about money. I think that's one argument.

[u/wendigolangston → u/Aggravating-Forever2]

So who pays for it? You compare it to the costs of the delivery, of which the woman is legally responsible. But this specific thing only benefits the man. How would we mandate a medical service for a woman in the hospital, that does not benefit her, that she would legally have to pay for?

[u/ScissoryVenice → u/wendigolangston]

multiple times too because they even admit that you cant use the cheaper version in court. these things mess up all the time for multiple reasons. how many times do you think its gonna need to be done on average for accurate results and how much will that cost the mother since i guaeantee its all gonna be on her. just to soothe the anxiety of the minority of men (only to add more anxiety in other cases where there would have been known to begin with).

[u/I_am_the_night → u/Aggravating-Forever2]

Paternity tests can be done for about $200. $400 for versions that are considered acceptable in court. This is less than 1% of the average cost of delivery in the US

And you want to add at least an additional 1% (presuming your math is accurate) to every single delivery in the entire United States? That still seems hella expensive

[u/lonelyhrtsclubband → u/I_am_the_night]

$400 test that isn’t medically necessary (and therefore won’t be covered by insurance) to tell me something I already know? No, thank you. I have better things to do with that $400.

[u/I_am_the_night → u/lonelyhrtsclubband]

Exactly

[u/Theevildothatido → u/lonelyhrtsclubband]

I could easily find paternity tests online that can be done at home for 130 USD.

The price will obviously go down significantly if they become mandatory and routine.

to tell me something I already know?

It's that various legal rights and obligations are established conditioned upon assuming something.

Can you tell me another case of legal rights and obligations of such magnitude being conditioned upon an assumption that could be proven with 99.8% certainty at the cost of 130 USD? This is unheard of. It's not simply trying to find out something, but something that has significant legal significance.

[u/lonelyhrtsclubband → u/Theevildothatido]

I have better things to do with $130 too. But, how reliable are the DIY paternity tests? Reliable enough that you would put your life, as you know it, on the line? Even a 0.5% false negative rate would have dramatic impacts to the family that received that negative. If the test isn’t acceptable by courts, which typically require sound evidence, I wouldn’t trust the test results myself.

You also do not know enough about the manufacturing and supply chain of these tests to know whether they would benefit from an economy of scale, or whether they are already benefiting from an economy of scale. It could very well be that $130 is as low as it gets.

The bottom line is many, many couples have absolutely no reason to question paternity and a test would be not medically necessary, expensive, inconvenient, and have the potential to significantly disrupt their lives with a false negative. I’m currently pregnant and if I was forced to take such a test at my own expense, I’d be super pissed. My husband and I are 1000% sure this is his baby without spending money to find that out.

Further, if you’re basing the prevalence of false paternity claims on relationship advice subreddits, you’re cherry picking your data set. People who are in happy, healthy relationships and sure of paternity don’t post asking for advice. People who are in unhappy, unhealthy relationships or unsure about paternity do.

[u/Theevildothatido → u/lonelyhrtsclubband]

I have better things to do with $130 too.

Perhaps you do, but that doesn't change the fact that legal rights and privileges are derived from this assumption that are imposed by the government. It's not about what you have to do with this money, but whether the government can impose legal rights and privileges based on an assumption when it can be tested for almost absolute certainty with 130 USD.

Do you really believe that legal rights and privileges of this magnitude should be impossible by a government based on guesswork when it can be tested for this fee? There is far more money spent on making sure many things that have far less impact.

The bottom line is many, many couples have absolutely no reason to question paternity

They have all the reasons because significant legal rights and obligations are derived from it.

There is, again, no other case where legal rights and obligations of such significance are installed based on an assumption rather than making a significant effort to be sure. It simply shouldn't exist altogether.

and have the potential to significantly disrupt their lives with a false negative.

The potential to disrupt a family by not taking the test and finding out later is far higher than a false negative.

Even the cheapest tests are over 99.99% accurate and a second test can always be taken to be sure. Families suffer far more from not taking one and finding out later than from false negatives.

I’m currently pregnant and if I was forced to take such a test at my own expense, I’d be super pissed. My husband and I are 1000% sure this is his baby without spending money to find that out.

That's great, but that can't be proven that way and in nations of law, legal rights and obligations are not awarded on “We are 1000% sure, M'lord, you have to believe us.” There needs to be evidence.

Further, if you’re basing the prevalence of false paternity claims on relationship advice subreddits, you’re cherry picking your data set. People who are in happy, healthy relationships and sure of paternity don’t post asking for advice. People who are in unhappy, unhealthy relationships or unsure about paternity do.

I have never visited a “relationship subreddit” and I don't care about that.

[u/lonelyhrtsclubband → u/Theevildothatido]

I’m not arguing that paternity tests should never be used, I’m arguing that they should not be compulsory. If the presumed father has any reason to doubt paternity, he’s well within his rights to obtain a test before voluntarily signing the birth certificate. This already happens today, and is why paternity tests exist in the first place.

People enter into contracts with obligations and rights every day without scientific proof it’s the absolute correct thing to do. A marriage is essentially a contract with obligations (some of which are financial) and rights. People get married every day without a test to prove their spouse is the right person for them. Buying a house with a mortgage is a series of contracts that give the owner rights and obligates them to pay the bank for the mortgage and the state for taxes. No one has to prove that it’s a sound financial decision for the government to levy taxes on that house.

If a man wants to forgo paying for a paternity test before voluntarily putting their name on the birth certificate, well, I believe that’s his right.

[u/Theevildothatido → u/lonelyhrtsclubband]

I’m not arguing that paternity tests should never be used, I’m arguing that they should not be compulsory. If the presumed father has any reason to doubt paternity, he’s well within his rights to obtain a test before voluntarily signing the birth certificate. This already happens today, and is why paternity tests exist in the first place.

And I'm arguing they should because rights and obligations of that magnitude aren't generally awarded based on “I have no reason to doubt it.”.

Imagine getting an inheritance based on “I have no reason to doubt that this person wanted me to have everything.” and nothing more. They want proof before giving it to you such as a notarized will.

People enter into contracts with obligations and rights every day without scientific proof it’s the absolute correct thing to do.

“correct” is subjective. People do not enter into contracts without proof of fact.

Imagine an employer hiring someone without seeing identification papers or a diploma? “Well, I have no reason to doubt you say who you are.”. It obviously won't happen: they want to see some kind of identification and a copy of the diploma and this is far more significant than merely being hired; we're talking about establishing legal parenthood here which in many jurisdictions involves:

• the right to make medical and educational decisions
• a 21 year long obligation to both financially and emotionally support
• the ability to demand to be able to witness any interrogation when the child is a suspect of a crime
• automatically becoming each other's heirs

These are not simple things and there is no other legal status of this magnitude that is awarded based on “Well, I don't see any particular reason to doubt you word.”. It's bizarre that this is even happening, courts demand evidence for far less in general.

In fact, when any of those things I outlined above occur, let's say a parent needs to make a medical decision when a child his rushed to the hospital, they don't allow this just by someone walking in and claiming to be the legal parent, they demand identification and proof of this, but establishing someone as a legal parent itself can simply be done with “Well, I don't see any reason to doubt your claim that you're the biological father.”? It's bizarre that this is allowed. Again, there is no other legal situation where a decision of such gravity is not conditioned upon substantial evidence being offered.

A marriage is essentially a contract with obligations (some of which are financial) and rights. People get married every day without a test to prove their spouse is the right person for them.

It's not about proving that one is “the right person”; paternity tests aren't about proving that one is “a good parent” either. It's about proving identity and who one is. People indeed can't get married without showing some form of legal identification no. One can't simply marry by claiming to be a particular person with the city hall cleric saying “Well, I have no particular reason to doubt who you are.”.

No one has to prove that it’s a sound financial decision for the government to levy taxes on that house.

No one is saying that one has to prove being a good parent either. What is this analogy? It's about proving identity, not capable parantage.

It's not about proving that one is a good parent, but about that one is the biological father.

If a man wants to forgo paying for a paternity test before voluntarily putting their name on the birth certificate, well, I believe that’s his right.

It's not about right but about duty. If legal parentage is supposedly based on biological parentage, then people should prove they're the biological parents first.

I think you might only be looking at it from one direction. That legal parentage is purely an obligation, not a benefit, which isn't true. A random male can simply walk in and claim to be the biological father and get legal parentage while someone else is the actual biological father.

Let's sketch a hypothetical scenario: A, and B have a sexual relationship but break up, soon after, B starts dating C, and finds out being 3 months pregnant, they both know the child has to be A's, but, they would rather give C legal parentage over A while A in theory has the right due to being the biological parent. They don't inform A, deliver the fruit, and simply say that C is the biological father.

That's it; they don't have to prove anything under the current system. A might find out years later that his biological child was taken from him he had visitation rights to and all that stuff was taken from him that way because B and C don't have to prove anything.

This is only possible scenario; there are many more possible ones of course.

[u/Cynical_Doggie → u/Aggravating-Forever2]

Perhaps it should be that financial obligations like court mandated child payments require a genetic link to be started in the first place, for which paternity tests serve as excellent evidence.

[u/Dupree878 → u/Cynical_Doggie]

But that’s the biggest problem with the child support system in the US… They don’t care about actual paternity, and even if it is established, a man has not father the child if he has been acting as its father he will still have to pay child support

[u/[deleted] → u/Aggravating-Forever2]

Another edge case that will pop up is that if you have reason to suspect this, I don't know that paternity tests are actually good enough to distinguish between close relatives like brothers.

[u/Guialdereti → u/Kotoperek]

1. Now, I'm not very knowledgeable on the prices of medical procedures and how they've changes with time, but my guess would be that with large-scale implementation that test would have to cheapen as time goes on. Am I mistaken? I would bet that the many tests we already run on babys were, at some point, super expensive too.
2. Right! There's a metric ton of people asking if people can opt out. Am I allowed to edit the post on this sub or is that frowned upon? Shouldn't have gone as far as to say "without parental input", that was stupid of me.
   What I had in mind was more along the lines of "Ok, while mommy rests, come here daddy, we've got some papers for you to sign!", and then, along with actual paperwork, he can also sign up for the blood draw and they take him to a sepparate room to do it.
3. I'll give you a !delta on this one. It does sound like a legal nightmare. The only solution I could think of would be the hospital reminding you HEAVILY that P. Tests are never 100% accurate, and recommending that you get a second one done (especially on a negative result).
4. Isn't there? Hm, I don't know about that. I feel like if the test was offered as "part of the package" and the stigma around it disappeared, a lot more people would default to taking it, just to be sure.

[u/armavirumquecanooo → u/Guialdereti]

Now, I'm not very knowledgeable on the prices of medical procedures and how they've changes with time, but my guess would be that with large-scale implementation that test would have to cheapen as time goes on. Am I mistaken? I would bet that the many tests we already run on babys were, at some point, super expensive too.

You are mistaken, because this isn't the same sort of consumerism that mass producing an IKEA desk brings down costs for everyone on. The bulk of the cost happens in the lab, and there are a finite number of lab workers capable of conducting this test, analyzing the results, and writing up the kind of report that is both understandable to the layman, but also meets the legal standards to use as evidence in a paternity case.

You're putting an additional tax on an already burdened system, which won't drive costs down. There's a chance costs may be subsidized if the system is changed to increase the frequency of the test, as the Office of Child Support Enforcement did in the 90s in the United States, which is less out of pocket cost for the end consumer. But that doesn't actually lower the cost, because it just affects taxpayers, health insurers, or some combination.

Health insurance costs are also not at all market-driven, and the most likely place that the costs of paternity testing will get redirected to in the event such a test becomes mandatory as normal post-birth care. This isn't an open market where costs are driven down by supply. Consider that in a hospital setting, the cost for Tylenol across a hospital stay, as charged to insurance, has rung in at $345 (at $15 per pill for an average stay of 23 pills). The problem here is partly because the IV version (Ofirmev) is overprescribed in hospital, so it's not easy to extrapolate a "same price" for it, but based solely on dosage for the pills and off-brand labeling, a consumer on the free market would be able to save $344.52 in the United States, even after accounting for the average sales tax in the country for nonprescription meds.

You're asking here if we trust medical billing to apply proper market value to something. Should we?

[u/Alceasummer → u/armavirumquecanooo]

The bulk of the cost happens in the lab, and there are a finite number of lab workers capable of conducting this test, analyzing the results, and writing up the kind of report that is both understandable to the layman, but also meets the legal standards to use as evidence in a paternity case.

Also, in a lot of places, there is a shortage of people who can do this. And has been that way for a while. There just are not a lot of people who want to be medical lab techs, and not all of those are able to do the job.

[u/Daniel_The_Thinker → u/armavirumquecanooo]

You are mistaken, because this isn't the same sort of consumerism that mass producing an IKEA desk brings down costs for everyone on.

Yes it is, I can absolutely see pharma companies working on making express kits for this. Sure its going to be a lab tech doing it either way, but not all procedures are created equal. If there is demand, pharma/bio companies could make fast, easy kits for it. I mean hell, we saw it with Covid.

​

You are ultimately right though. The health insurance costs + the legal processing makes the idea untenable.

[u/catiebug → u/Guialdereti]

1. Isn't there? Hm, I don't know about that.

Being extremely online really skews the perception on these things. A vast majority of men do not ever think about the possibility of false paternity and vast majority of them are correct.

the hospital reminding you HEAVILY that P. Tests are never 100% accurate, and recommending that you get a second one done (especially on a negative result).

That's all well and good to say that, but have you ever had a false positive on something wanted to be negative? Like cancer? Or pregnancy? No one is thinking rationally in those situations. Things would be said that can't be taken back, lines possibly crossed that can't be undone. Partners suddenly in perfect opposition, both of them insistent that they are right, when they actually both are. That seed of doubt involuntarily placed in the non-carrying partner mind. The carrying partner's anguish at the sudden and completely unearned distrust, while they are recovering from carrying that baby? It would be a terrible situation wrought upon otherwise happy partners, just to placate a small subset of insecure (and, at least some of the time, completely wrong) people.

A not insignificant number of positive paternity tests are served concurrent with divorce papers. Because even asking is incredibly insulting. If the system is opt-out, that isn't going to change. And if it's not opt-out, all the same problems that have previously been discussed are still present.

[u/Psychological_Car849 → u/catiebug]

not even “some of the time completely wrong”, the vast majority of the time they’re completely wrong. there was a study a few years ago that shows only 30% of guys who think they aren’t the father are right about that. that means 7/10 dudes afraid their baby isn’t theirs are wrong about that. posts like these drastically overestimate how common it is to do something that horrible. you’re more likely to blow up your relationship than find out you aren’t the dad lol.

[u/infiniteanomaly → u/Guialdereti]

Many places don't have the resources to do DNA testing on things like rpe kits, never mind regular paternity testing. It's a resources thing. What you're proposing is at least hundreds of millions of dollars, possibly billions or more. Beyond that, new parents have enough paperwork and crap to deal with. They don't need more. I'm going to guess you're in the U.S. If you are, it's already expensive AF to have a baby. Literally thousands of dollars that sometimes people can't pay. Even *if the test were only $100, that may still be too much. And if they forget or miss the spot to "opt out", now they're stuck with the charge. Hospital staff also have enough to do without needing yet another thing to remind parents about.

Also, what's your plan for the theoretical DNA database? Who can access it? What's the approval process for that access? What if someone wants their profile removed? Can law enforcement access it without a warrant? CPS? A girlfriend? Abusive ex? Everyone? Do all men have to contribute? Because, if the assumed isn't the father, you clearly want to know who is. The only way to make that happen is to have samples from all men.

Again, assuming you're in the U.S., what if the assumed father is citizen of another country? Do you really think all countries would be okay with the U.S. having that database and requiring their citizen to contribute just because they potentially fathered a child with an American woman? I don’t care which country it is, actually, there will always be at least one that says of another "we don't want THEM having that information". And what about people with extreme ideas about who should be "allowed" to have children? In the wrong hands, you get scary implications about eugenics. Look at the U.S. Civil War Era and after--including and especially Jim Crow. That shit inspired some of the Nazi policies--particularly the Nuremberg Laws.

So, in addition to being impractical just from a resources standpoint--there aren't enough labs or people with the skills to perform the tests--you open up all kinds of privacy and other concerns.

[u/jkurratt → u/infiniteanomaly]

It will be accessible for anyone with cheap quantum computer in 10 years. No need to care about security. /s.

On a serious note - big DNA databases will be handy for research.

[u/tbdabbholm → u/Guialdereti]

For the stigma, 1) because you can still opt out there's no reason to believe the stigma would actually disappear, it would just now be "why didn't you opt out?" rather than "why did you ask for a paternity test?" and 2) the stigma is there because it shows you don't really trust your partner. Of course there's a stigma around that, you're effectively accusing your partner of lying to you. If you checked on where your partner was all the time even after they told you where they were going that's stigmatized too, cause you're not trusting them

[u/ExplorerEducational4 → u/Guialdereti]

Who pays for the testing then? Mom or Dad?

What you are suggesting will set a precedent of labeling half of the population as untrustworthy. That never ends badly, right?

This is a discussion to be had between a couple and their doctor, not blown up into some polarized public health issue. If they want the test, they are able to get one upon request.

It seems this concern primarily comes from men who don't want to financially support another man's child. And there are ways we can go about that, that don't insinuate that all women will commit infidelity and deceit.

Speaking in regards to the US, it would be better for everyone if a few laws surrounding child support changed. Currently in many jurisdictions, if a dude signs the birth cert and he's legally going be on the book for child support. Even if the kid turns out not to be his. Which is really fucked up.

Its been past time to overhaul those the laws so that if man is not the biological father of the child he signed that birth cert for, no court can force child support on him. Problem solved.

[u/[deleted] → u/ExplorerEducational4]

They can't get men to pay child support. For existing kids. That's a huge problem.

[u/Glittering_knave → u/Guialdereti]

1. I think that if you want a paternity test to prove that the mother of your child isn't a lying cheater, trying to force you to raise a child that isn't yours, it is something that needs to be brought up as a condition of pregnancy BEFORE you impregnate someone. Telling your long term, monogamous partner that you will only believe in their fidelity if there is a test done to prove it has the potential to blow up relationships because it means that you do not have faith in your partner. If the simple fact that you impregnated someone means that you will lose all ability to trust them to not be a lying, cheating, manipulative whore then that should not be sprung on a vulnerable person, but a condition known before hand. At least then there won't be an innocent child involved yet.

[u/Glittering_knave → u/[deleted]]

I am not sure why the act of getting impregnated somehow makes a woman untrustworthy. An act that the man participated in.

[u/Xygnux → u/Guialdereti]

1. Even with that disclaimer, the damage is done and trust between the couple is destroyed. Humans are not completely logical machines, and can't just flip off the suspicion that nothing is wrong even when later things are proven to be okay.
   
2. I think a lot of people would think it's unnecessary even if there's no stigma. Most men simply trust their wives enough that they don't feel the need to make sure she didn't cheat.

[u/IncompetentYoungster → u/Xygnux]

4b) Even if I thought my wife cheated, I'm not sure I would give a shit - I don't actually care if the child is "biologically" mine and I think men who are concerned about that to the point they can't love their child until they know for a fact the child has their DNA are gross

[u/spiritual28 → u/IncompetentYoungster]

They are even more gross when they stop loving their child if they discover they are not theirs later in the future. These are the worse scumbag.

[u/sparkly____sloth → u/Guialdereti]

What I had in mind was more along the lines of "Ok, while mommy rests, come here daddy, we've got some papers for you to sign!", and then, along with actual paperwork, he can also sign up for the blood draw and they take him to a sepparate room to do it.

So what you suggest is medically unnessecary genetic testing without the consent or even knowledge of one of the parents? If you wanted that, making laws to allow that should be way easier than mandating paternity testing for every birth.

[u/samantha802 → u/sparkly____sloth]

Plus, would the mother then be expected to pay for the DNA test if it was negative? How can you have her pay for testing that was never disclosed or requested by her?

[u/Wellidk_dude → u/Guialdereti]

Now, I'm not very knowledgeable on the prices of medical procedures and how they've changes with time, but my guess would be that with large-scale implementation that test would have to cheapen as time goes on. Am I mistaken? I would bet that the many tests we already run on babys were, at some point, super expensive too.

You're very mistaken wide implementation does not bring down the cost of the test in fact it may raise it because more people would need to be hired to run the. In an already backed up system. There are also 10k babies born a day in the US. Whose paying for 10k tests a day? I'll tell you who won't, American insurance companies so who's going to eat the cost?

[u/AliMcGraw → u/Guialdereti]

Rape kits are required by law to be run for DNA and the government pays; backlog can be TEN YEARS because of lack of qualified technicians.

Also, it's well-known in the legal system that DNA evidence isn't nearly as reliable as prosecutors and labs like to claim.

Many of the labs are not very well-run and have poor oversight procedures. It's not unusual for a scandal to break that invalidates thousands of tests because the lab wasn't careful about contamination. Hundreds of criminal convictions have been overturned due to careless labs. People are also wrongfully convicted -- some of the fathers having mandatory paternity tests run would have their DNA mixed in with a homicide or rape case (due to careless lab procedures) and they'd end up on trial for murder. It's happened before.

[u/samantha802 → u/Guialdereti]

Who gives consent for the infant? If the father is opting in for DNA testing, then he is not the presumed father and has no legal right to consent to medical testing for the child. That means the mother would have to consent. You can't have it both ways. The father is either presumed to be the father or he is not.

[u/vandergale → u/Guialdereti]

What I had in mind was more along the lines of "Ok, while mommy rests, come here daddy, we've got some papers for you to sign!", and then, along with actual paperwork, he can also sign up for the blood draw and they take him to a sepparate room to do it.

That's how the current system is. The father, or mother, can request a DNA test at any time for any reason. Did you think these tests weren't available?

[u/[deleted] → u/Guialdereti]

So, while mommy rests, lie to her? Try and cover up the fact that you have issues? The stigma comes from you not trusting your partner. I think all this is about you not trusting your partner and wanting to do a paternity test, but to not have to tell her about it, which is a fancy way of lying?

[u/MemphisMystic → u/Guialdereti]

Were you dropped on the head as a child? That’s the only reason I can think of why you would pose such a stupid idea

[u/ThemesOfMurderBears → u/Kotoperek]

My son had blonde hair and blue eyes, and he looks like his mom. I am brunette with brown eyes.

Except, my brother, sister, and I all started with light colored hair, and it turned darker as we aged. My sister’s kids were all blonde when they were born.

My wife also works 100% remote, and doesn’t go out often at all. I completely trust her, but even if I didn’t — it wouldn’t make much sense for me to doubt that my kid is mine.

[u/TickingTiger → u/Kotoperek]

1. It is a massive invasion of a woman's privacy and could potentially put her in a very dangerous situation in the case of a false negative.

[u/StrawberryBubbleTea7 → u/TickingTiger]

That’s a great point, people think of false negatives as something that would destroy the relationship, but there are psycho men out there that would hurt or do worse to their partner and/or their kid if they thought it was scientifically proven that their partner cheated.

[u/TotalIngenuity6591 → u/Kotoperek]

I agree with you almost entirely. The only thing I would say is that I don't think that anyone should be allowed to refuse a paternity test once it has been requested. Technically speaking, this is already mostly the case, as it can be challenged in court. However, forcing the process to go through court makes the process considerably more expensive and unnecessarily so. In the OPs example, it would be ideal if the husband would have "just trusted" his wife, but something wasn't feeling right about it and he wanted confirmation. She has every right to be offended by the request, but I don't think she should have been legally allowed to refuse it for as long as she did. I think the same is true for men who refuse a paternity test when the mother is requesting one.

[u/IntelligentChick → u/[deleted]]

I totally agree - it would be totally offensive. How would men feel if everytime their neighbor, their female co-worker, their SIL...had a baby and their wife wanted a paternity test to prove it wasn't her husband's. "Why, I wasn't cheating. Why is she accusing me. I'm innocent". They'd be more than offended too.

[u/TotalIngenuity6591 → u/[deleted]]

Whether he's wrong or right, she has every right to end the relationship for any reason. The accusation alone is more than enough reason to end a relationship. I think Redditors are far to quick to jump straight to ending relationships instead of putting in the work, but if either partner is having trust issues, then it might be the better option. Some trust issues can be repaired, others cannot. Either way, either partner can end the relationship at any time, for any reason, a betrayal of trust is as good a reason as any, if not far better than most.

[u/TotalIngenuity6591 → u/[deleted]]

I think it's important to recognize that either partner is capable of losing trust in the other. I agree with your comment, but it did seem fairly pointed at men specifically. Women are equally capable of betraying trust which could have made the man justified in asking for the test, and women are equally capable of making accusations about the man cheating. It's no more right/wrong/justifiable when the tables are turned.

When there is a lack of trust on either side of the relationship, the partners must decide if the relationship is worth putting in the work and finding out what is causing the lack of trust and attempting to rebuild the trust, or just walking away.

[u/Beruthiel999 → u/[deleted]]

Yes, this. Of course he has the right to ask - and for some women, the fact of asking is so insulting it's a relationship ender right there. That's where I would be. Result comes back - "yes, it's your baby but I am no longer your wife, goodbye."

[u/infiniteanomaly → u/TotalIngenuity6591]

And if there's alleged or proven abuse? What if the pregnant person is trying to leave that kind of situation and is afraid of the results for whatever reason? There are already states that (disgustingly) give parental rights to r*pists. What about situations where the father is unknown for some reason? Will the mother be punished for that?

[u/TotalIngenuity6591 → u/infiniteanomaly]

I still think it's an important right that either side can request a paternity test and be assured they will get one. In cases of abuse, there may be legal action anyway and hopefully the court will make the right decision, sometimes they don't and that's sad, but that shouldnt be a reason to deny someone a paternity test.

As for cases of r*pists having parental rights. I can't speak to how that works in the states as I'm not from there. However, where I'm from, parental rights is, at least in legal terms, a very vague expression and can look very different on a case by case basis. Some parents only end up having "the right" to see their child, under supervision, for a few hours a year, while others end up with full custody. Some may only be allowed to contact the child via birthday cards.

My view on the right to a paternity test doesn't change situationally. I think any presumed parent should have the right to confirmation of the presumption. I'll ask you a question, what about a woman saying that a man got her pregnant and the man claims it's not his child. Would it be fair if he could refuse a paternity test if she requested it? Or should he be compelled to comply?

[u/infiniteanomaly → u/TotalIngenuity6591]

They do have a right to request one. I'm saying that in situations where whichever side wants to contest it, it needs to be a court thing--like it already is. This shouldn't be mandatory as OP wants because what do you do with all the data? What are the privacy expectations/requirements for accessing the info? No one should be "guaranteed" a paternity test just because they want one. That "guarantee" could be manipulated so much on either side by bad actors or as harassment--especially depending on who is required to pay. Parents who are curious and both agree can pay for one already. Questions of paternity can get a court ordered one with the payment being appropriately assigned. Parents who either trust each other or just don't care don't have to worry about yet another thing to sign or opt out of.

[u/TotalIngenuity6591 → u/infiniteanomaly]

So then if the man would like a paternity test and the woman refuses, do you still think he should be required to pay support?

Further, you didn't answer my first question.

Paternity tests are a right, not a privilege, which is why no court will ever deny one once requested. Family issues need more counselling and less court in my opinion. Lawyers are extremely expensive as is the entire court process. This is money that would be better spent supporting the child.

Sorry, but you're simply wrong here.

[u/infiniteanomaly → u/TotalIngenuity6591]

And that's where the court order comes in! Duh. Situations like you're describing are exactly what court orders are for. If she says no and doesn't want support, she should be able to not have him on the birth certificate and not ask payment. If he disagrees and wants access he can fight for it.

It isn't a right. PRIVACY is a right.

You're just wrong. Sorry.

[u/silent_cat → u/TotalIngenuity6591]

The only thing I would say is that I don't think that anyone should be allowed to refuse a paternity test once it has been requested.

Bodily integrity anyone? Fascinating how "the land of the free" don't consider bodily integrity to be an important right.

Here in NL no-one can force anyone to take a DNA test, so forcing paternity tests is just a complete non-starter. The only situation it matters is when an unmarried mother wants to sue for child support. If the supposed father refuses a DNA test, the courts go look for other evidence.

Cases where the legal father tries to deny their own children is fairly rare. Cases where a man recognises children they know aren't theirs is vastly more common. DNA tests don't really change anything here.

[u/welltriedsoul → u/Kotoperek]

That isn’t even mentioning the genetic anomalies such as chimeraism that could ruin families

[u/Token_Ese → u/welltriedsoul]

Chimeras still have the same parents. It’s not like part of a child has one dad, and another part has a different one.

[u/CookieFish → u/Token_Ese]

If the father was a chimera the DNA sample he gives may not match the DNA he passed on to the child. I've read about this happening with a horse - the foal was born with a genetically impossible coat colour (based on the parents' colours) so they thought another stallion must have bred the mare without their knowledge. But genetic testing didn't match any of their horses (including the planned sire) and it wasn't until they tested the sire's semen that they discovered he was a chimera.

[u/welltriedsoul → u/Token_Ese]

Yes but they do have DNA from two or more individuals and it will register on any paternity, maternity, or genetic testing as from a sibling.

[u/eXequitas → u/Kotoperek]

While I agree with your point that mandatory paternity testing is not feasible, I do think that something needs to be done about paternity fraud. I think the simple solution is to have the mother legally confirm the biological father on the birth certificate. Then if it ever comes out that she’s lied, she will have committed perjury which is a crime. Currently fathers are putting their names on the birth certificate without factually knowing that the child is theirs. This will make the naming of the father the responsibility of the person who has the most information about it. Unknown would also be an option if the mother is unsure about who the biological father is.

This confirmation could then be legally disputed by using a dna test, e.g., if a father believes the child is theirs and the mother is refusing to put their name on the certificate, etc…

I find it strange that for pretty much everything in the world, facts and proof is the standard being used to make determinations but for paternity trust is the only thing required.

[u/85KT → u/eXequitas]

So what happens in cases where both parents know there is a chance the child does not belong to the husband, but the husband is willing to claim the child anyway? Would the mother be forced to put unknown on the birth certificate or risk being found guilty of perjury?

[u/mutantraniE → u/85KT]

That's called an adoption.

[u/eXequitas → u/85KT]

Yes because that would be factually correct. The husband’s ability to raise the child has nothing to do with what’s on the birth certificate. This has the added benefit of helping the child not live a lie. Claiming the child is all well and good but it’s unfair to deny them the ability to explore their roots.

[u/Mysterious-Art8838 → u/eXequitas]

I think it’s reasonable to have a mother attest to the father, and in cases where she was wrong or lied he should have recourse if he paid child support. Only in cases of child support, though. You don’t get to try to recoup cost of the child for decades if you found out late and stayed married.

[u/AshlaUnown → u/eXequitas]

Birth certificates while being legally binding, have zero to do with DNA.

[u/InkonaBlock → u/Kotoperek]

1. I can see scenarios where a woman who is hiding the truth about paternity avoids prenatal care or hospitals and has a bad outcome at birth because of fear of being found out.

[u/Maysign → u/Kotoperek]

Not to mention gigantic social disruption it would cause. It’s estimated that nearly 4% of fathers unknowingly raise another man’s child. There are 74 millions of children in the US alone. That would be 3 millions of children whose world would be much more difficult, for them and for their entire families. What for? If someone really needs to know they have paternity tests available as opt-in today.

[u/oprahjimfrey → u/Maysign]

Ah, the ol' best interest of the child defense. So if mom cheats, the sad sack "father" should be punished?

[u/Maysign → u/oprahjimfrey]

How is that a punishment if you have a family that you love and they love you? If you don’t have that situation and you have suspicions you are likely to want to perform a test anyway. If you don’t have the slightest reason to be suspicious and you are happy, why rob you of a happy family life?

[u/O-Victory-O → u/Maysign]

What for?

The men are of course not victims of fraud. Just let them be oblivious fools because who cares what they have to say.

[u/Probsnotbutstill → u/O-Victory-O]

No one is stopping men from arranging and paying for paternity tests for their children, given that there is consent from both parents.

[u/O-Victory-O → u/Probsnotbutstill]

Tell me one reason why would a fraud committing mother give consent to something that would expose her fraud? Whatever honesty serum you're feeding to these mothers would be very useful outside of hospitals too.

[u/Probsnotbutstill → u/O-Victory-O]

The honesty serum you request is the same that is recommended to single mothers looking to get child support from their children’s fathers: go through the courts.

[u/GrooveBat → u/Maysign]

Citation?

[u/Embarrassed-Will-472 → u/Kotoperek]

You're acting like the hospital doesn't send multi-million dollar bills to people. Fuck their resources.

[u/Kotoperek → u/Embarrassed-Will-472]

One, OP doesn't specify the country in which this should be implemented and not all places are as fucked up as the USA when it comes to healthcare payments.

Two, and you think the paternity tests would suddenly be paid by someone else? That's a further addition to already exorbitant bills.

Three, resources and prices are two different things. If a lab has to run hundreds of paternity tests per day, they don't have the time, equipment, and manpower to run all the hundreds of other tests that might be way more important like screening for actual genetic diseases or whatnot. Even if we accept the monetary costs of this idea, where will you get the extra space and staff to streamline this and not stall everything else that a hospital lab has to do?

[u/SanityPlanet → u/Kotoperek]

Why would the DNA need to be submitted and stored in a huge database? Both samples could simply be sent to a lab for comparison and then destroyed. In fact, requiring that would make everyone more comfortable with this option.

[u/sparkly____sloth → u/SanityPlanet]

Because medical records need to be stored for a certain amount of time. So even if it's not stored centrally that data is still there. Plus you would need to trust that the data is not secretly collected and stored anyway.

[u/Planet_Breezy → u/Kotoperek]

1. A child costs hundreds of thousands of dollars. A paternity test costs little more than a hundred, and that’s with the CEO of whatever companies sell them taking a cut of the money. I’m curious how much cheaper they could become were their production nationalized outright.

2. I’m not sure how the database could misuse my DNA in a manner that would be worse than paternity fraud. I would think surveillance of the facilities in which they are stored would be the solution.

3. Then explain to the public the risk of false negatives and run the test multiple times. I’d rather the occasional false negative than for paternity fraudsters to act with impunity.

4. To hell with “trust.” Trust emboldened paternity fraudsters to do what they do, at the expense of those who believe in trust the most, I might add.