Considerations

Understanding politics, finance prediction, dating rules, marcom marketing, and the Israel conflict by a global writing team

Considerations header image 2

Paternity Tests

November 20th, 2009 · No Comments · Civil Liberties, Conservative Pundits, Culture, Dating, Economics, Feminism, Law, Politics, Sex, Technology

sex crime attorney, sex crime lawyer, sex crime defense, sex offender registration requirements, sex bomb baby, sex workers rights, sex offender crimes, sex addiction treatment centers, sex offender registration laws, dating while divorcingThe New York Times Mag­a­zine reports on how pater­nity test­ing is chang­ing father­hood in the United States. The fea­ture arti­cle, of course, leads with a poignant story:

For four years, Mike had known that the girl he had rocked to sleep and danced with across the living-room floor was not, as they say, “his.” The rev­e­la­tion from a DNA test was dev­as­tat­ing and prompted him to leave his wife — but he had not renounced their child. He con­tin­ued to feel that in all the ways that mat­tered, she was still his daugh­ter, and he faith­fully paid her child sup­port. It was only when he learned that his ex-wife was about to marry the man who she said actu­ally was the girl’s bio­log­i­cal father that Mike flipped. Sup­port­ing another man’s child sud­denly became unbearable.

Two years after fil­ing the suit that sought to end his pater­nal rights, Mike is still irate about the fix he’s in. “I pay child sup­port to a bio­log­i­cally intact fam­ily,” Mike told me, his voice crack­ing with incredulity. “A father and mother, mar­ried, who live with their own child. And I pay sup­port for that child. How ridicu­lous is that?”…

Mike’s conun­drum is increas­ingly play­ing out in courts across the coun­try, a result of polit­i­cal, social and tech­no­log­i­cal shifts. Stricter fed­eral rules have pressed states to chase down fathers and hold them respon­si­ble for chil­dren born out­side of mar­riage, a cat­e­gory that includes 40 per­cent of all births. At the same time, DNA tests have become eas­ier, cheaper and more reli­able. Swip­ing a few cheek cells and pay­ing a cou­ple hun­dred dol­lars can answer the ques­tion that has plagued men since the dawn of time: Am I really the father?

This issue has indeed puz­zled human­ity for thou­sands of years. As Aris­to­tle report­edly put it (I can­not find the pri­mary source):

Moth­ers are fonder than fathers of their chil­dren because they are more cer­tain they are their own.

Still, is there some­thing hap­pen­ing today that caused the Times to deem this news­wor­thy? Per­haps there is. As state gov­ern­ments right­fully clamp down on dead­beat dads — of which my late father was one — more and more men want to know for sure whether they are indeed respon­si­ble for their child’s upbringing:

Over the last decade, the num­ber of pater­nity tests taken every year jumped 64 per­cent, to more than 400,000. That fig­ure counts only a sub­set of tests — those that are admis­si­ble in court and thus require an unbi­ased tester and a doc­u­mented chain of pos­ses­sion from test site to lab. Other tests are con­ducted by men who, like Mike, buy kits from the Inter­net or at the cor­ner Rite Aid, swab the inside of their cheeks and that of their puta­tive child’s and mail the sam­ples to a lab. Of course, the men who take the tests already ques­tion their pater­nity, and for about 30 per­cent of them, their hunch is right.

On the sur­face, this sounds incred­i­bly depress­ing to some­one who, like me, views mar­riage as a sacred, holy insti­tu­tion. But the sad real­ity is that eigh­teen per­cent of mar­ried women in the United States have cheated at least once. (The num­ber is prob­a­bly even higher since more than a few cheaters prob­a­bly lied to the poll­ster.) One in five Amer­i­cans — men and women — in monog­a­mous rela­tion­ships have cheated on his or her part­ner, accord­ing to the same sur­vey. With untold thou­sands of dol­lars on the line, can men really be blamed for want­ing to be sure?

This is yet another rea­son why Amer­i­can men are increas­ingly skep­ti­cal of mar­riage. Not only can wives divorce hus­bands for no rea­son and take half of their assets, courts can, as the Times arti­cle notes, also force hus­bands to pay for the chil­dren of the man with whom the wife cheated. Mod­ern soci­ety has devi­ated so much from the nat­ural order that chaos has resulted.

Related: The Bat­tle of the Sexes

(Hat tip: Roissy in DC)

Now Avail­able: E-Book down­load: “Let­ters from Israel: An Amer­i­can journalist’s adven­tures in the Holy Land.“

Every lit­tle bit helps! Any dona­tions to help us keep writ­ing are much appreciated:


VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rat­ing: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts:

  1. Mater­nity Leave
  2. Japan­ese Culture
  3. Rape
  4. A Mother at 70
  5. A Chris­t­ian Nation?

Tags:

No Comments so far ↓

  • Jeff

    The “nat­ural order” being “wives, sub­mit to thyne hus­bands”?  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Sam Scott

    That’s a Chris­t­ian idea. Jew­ish women never sub­mit to their hus­bands. LOL.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • The DNA Lady

    The bot­tom line is that each child deserves to start out life with the knowl­edge of his/her bio­log­i­cal par­ents. Irre­spec­tive of the bio­log­i­cal par­ents rela­tion­ship to each other and/or to the child — at least the child has a solid foun­da­tion on which to build his/her own life. Those of us lucky enough to know our ances­try will never know the empti­ness that ques­tion­able pater­nity and/or mater­nity cre­ates in chil­dren. I see count­less men and woman who have spent the bet­ter part of their adult lives try­ing to deter­mine who they are — all because “polite” soci­ety shamed their par­ents into not reveal­ing the truth.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Dan

    Mod­ern soci­ety? How do you define mod­ern soci­ety? For as long as humans have existed, peo­ple have “cheated” on their spouses. Humans aren’t ter­ri­bly monog­a­mous. I don’t think it’s any worse than it has been in the past. Through­out at least the Mid­dle Ages to mod­ern times mis­tresses, con­sorts, and other part­ners were accepted as part of the nat­ural order. Why is today so dif­fer­ent?  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Puma

    Jeff // 20 Novem­ber 2009 at 8:12 pm
    The “nat­ural order” being “wives, sub­mit to thyne husbands”?

    No Jeff, nat­ural order as in
    – Not reward­ing cheat­ing spouses with life­time alimony.
    – No reward­ing of proven per­pe­tra­tors of pater­nity fraud
    (when famous bankrob­bers Bon­nie & Clyde were caught, were the monies returned to the banks, or were they left with Bonnie’s kids — because you know they were like “inno­cent kids”?)

    Mod­ern Fam­ily Law is B.S.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Jeff

    Puma, I don’t know what your line of work or edu­ca­tional back­ground is, but in fact, it appears to me that mod­ern fam­ily law is fairer today to all par­ties than it has ever been in the past.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Sam Scott

    Both Puma and Jeff, to a degree, are correct.

    A long time ago — before there was any fam­ily law — women were largely at the mercy of their fathers and hus­bands. So women, to rate it math­e­mat­i­cally, were a –10 as far as legal pro­tec­tion. Now, how­ever, men are at a dis­ad­van­tage — but they are roughly at a –3 as far as legal protection.

    So, in sum, fam­ily law is more fair on aver­age, but men are now dis­crim­i­nated against.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Jeff

    Where are you get­ting these num­bers?  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Comment

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes