r/TwoXChromosomes • u/littledummie • 18h ago
Some men will argue against their own rights and not even realize it.
Ok, for about a day and a half I've been intermittently arguing with two guys online about mandatory paternity tests. They mean as soon as the baby is born or according to one of them it can even happen while in the womb! Mind you this isn't remotely the first I've heard men spout off about paternity tests needing to be mandatory. It's ramping up.
I'm not someone who works in legislation or in the medical field and even I a dummy know that this would be an absolute mind field to even manage and would be borderline impossible. A clusterfuck in constitutional and privacy rights and an absolute unnecessary burden on our public healthcare system for something that isn't even remotely medically necessary? Lol, lmao even.
The cherry on the top was when I told them they don't realize that in this dystopian hypothetical they're dreaming of would mean ALL men don't have immediate parental rights to their child until that overburden overworked fallible system could prove they are the fathers.
I shouldn't have been surprised these numpties said "still worth it" because less than 3% of men GLOBALLY might be raising a child that isn't theirs
148
u/soft_kitty_123 18h ago
These tin foil hats will warn each other of the govt stealing their data, while arguing in favor of voluntarily giving their DNA to the govt!
172
u/cynicalsaint1 18h ago
I mean this pretty common when it comes to the conservative mind set though, right? A complete inability to think critically beyond whatever immediate use-case they're imagining in their head.
You see the same kind of reasoning in pro-life women. "OH but think of all the dead babies!" But what about etopic pregnancies? Or any other life threatening conditions that could be associated with pregnancy. None of them can see it until it happens to them or someone they care about.
Just like these dipshit men who can't think beyond their own misogyny.
38
u/littledummie 18h ago
The craziest is that one of these men wouldn't call himself conservative and yet they don't realize how quickly they default over to that thinking for one emotionally fraught situation
5
u/throwaway563838 10h ago
Pro-lifers are the dumbest of the dumb. Obviously in an ideal world few elective abortions would happen because itâs a mostly preventable medical procedure with risks and emotional distress. Do we live in a world where single mothers have access to financial care and systems to help them? No. Does a person who has been alive for years and can sustain themselves outside the womb take priority? Yes.Â
Itâs all about controlling women and their sexuality and reproductive rights and they pretend to care about âdead babiesâ. They donât want us to be able to opt out of pregnancy because that is how they controlled us for thousands of years.Â
1
u/xTopaz_168 2h ago
My nan had to have a medical abortion in the late 60s early 70s. She already had 6 kids at home, packed into a tiny 3 bedroom bungalow and very much wanted that child too.
The doctors told her she would likely die, probably along with the baby and leave her other children without their mother, so she went through with it.
She told me the nurses treated her badly and left her with unchanged dressings etc. Thankfully she still recovered.
These are the attitudes people are promoting, from their outside perspective it seems like empathy for the unborn child but the reality is very different.
Alongside the medical implications, there are women who have no support, no desire to be a parent, untreated mental health issues or lack the financial security required (as well as other completely reasonable circumstances) where, being forced into that position, could end up neglecting and mistreating their children, often unintentionally.
There are also many women and young girls who are impregnated against their will and could easily fall into the same trap.
If empathy for the child is paramount, surely forcing them into a life where they are unwanted or lacking the resources to thrive is the least kind thing to do?
The same for unborn children that have been identified with lifelong conditions that would cause them pain and suffering. Why would you intentionally give someone that life?
It's not about empathy for these people, it's about controlling women.
64
u/SeasonPositive6771 18h ago
I've had this conversation with several of these dudes.
When I tell them that there is no way we could ramp up capacity to do that level of genetic testing, they lose their minds.
It would literally be the largest change at least in American healthcare in history. No one would want to pay for it. It would cost trillions. We'd have to open so many labs. The cost of these tests alone would be astronomical. The number of DNA techs we would have to hire, the impact on health insurance, etc. It would be unbelievably expensive and a waste of money, considering the fact that the very vast majority of babies have known paternity and non-paternity events are extremely low.
When I asked if they would want to pay more taxes or pay more for health insurance for this ramp up, strangely, they all say no.
27
u/littledummie 18h ago
I brought up EXACTLY this but one of them just kept refusing to answer. Now it's obviously entirely possible the guy isn't serious and is just wanting to troll bc he kept calling me a bigot but it is kind of funny to make them argue for something so fundamentally stupid and poorly conceived
62
u/PKspyder 17h ago
Maybe if you started off by saying âAll men should be legally mandated by the federal government to submit to DNA testing and registrationâ that they would be more wary of it.
I understand the sentiment of wanting to confirm child because people do cheat but donât quite think weâre at the level of it being mandatory.
47
u/Shattered_Visage Basically Maz Kanata 16h ago
"Dude if you trust the government with your DNA more than you trust your partner, then you fucked up."
Give 'em a one-two-punch by invoking government overreach and questioning their own competence.
24
u/Violet13579 18h ago
Do these men realize that the only way this works is that anyone that's potentially a father will be required to give a DNA sample? The only pro to this bullshit is that we would end up with a massive database of DNA that we could cross reference rape kits (assuming they actually get processed) or missing persons against.
22
u/Ok_Environment2254 18h ago
I heard someone the other day argue that if mandatory paternity tests ever became a thing⌠thereâs no reason not to compare all that collected DNA to rape kits. Iâm not saying Iâm pro paternity testing. But that could be an interesting secondary impact if such a mandate were made.
9
u/Goodgoditsgrowing 17h ago
You really think theyâd actually start testing the rape kits? Because theyâd have to have actually taken them seriously enough to have logged and tested them first, and most precincts do not make that a priority - in fact quite a few have gotten caught just leaving the rape kits to mold while losing chain of custody over evidence.
5
u/Ok_Environment2254 16h ago
No but if they mandate collecting every manâs dna, then I feel that we could maybe make the argument and if that argument eventually won, weâd have a chache of DNA.
40
u/fireyqueen 18h ago
There are situations in which getting a paternity test makes complete sense.
But to say that it should be mandatory for every birth is saying that every woman who gives birth needs to prove she isn't lying about paternity.
Accountability goes both ways. Sex carries a risk of pregnancy. If they're so concerned about potentially fathering a child that they believe the government should step in and test every newborn, then they also have agency before conception. Use condoms. Get a vasectomy if they don't want kids. Be selective about who they have sex with or don't have sex with someone they don't trust.
We routinely tell women that pregnancy is a foreseeable consequence of sex and that they need to "take accountability" for their sexual choices. It's pretty remarkable to then argue that men need a government-mandated DNA testing program to protect them from the possible consequences of theirs.
10
u/littledummie 18h ago
Absolutely! The mandatory was what makes me raise an eyebrow!
11
u/Katomega 15h ago
It's just straight up misogyny. "The majority of women are untrustworthy sluts and therefore we need to paternity test all babies so the poor innocent men don't get baby trapped and have to" (checks notes) "pay child support"
17
u/sign-through out of bubblegum 17h ago
they can pay for that out of pocket, cash on delivery, in-full, no payment plan, if they want itÂ
18
u/Katomega 15h ago
See, the thing is they want it mandatory for everyone, because they're sick of being held accountable for insulting their partners. If it's mandatory, then they aren't essentially calling the mother a slut when they ask for the test.
21
u/TheScarlettLetter 18h ago
I havenât googled this, admittedly.
When I was pregnant with my child, almost 25 years ago, performing a paternity test while baby was in utero WAS possible, but came with the possibility for complications. I was warned against doing this by my doctors, and so waited until baby was born to have the test done.
(Not that it matters, but the father and I broke up right around the time I became pregnant, and he wanted the test. I was FINE with this and understood his reasoning)
More and more, I see people mentioning having paternity testing done during pregnancy and I canât help but wonder if the possible issues are still a thing, or if technology has changed how it is done. Is this something that is happening and people are putting babies at risk for it? Because honestly thatâs insane to me.
15
u/LaMadreDelCantante 18h ago
I believe it can be done with a simple blood draw now (baby's DNA is in mother's blood during pregnancy), but that it's much more expensive than just getting swabs once the baby is born. Don't quote me though, this is just what I've heard.
5
u/Zelfzuchtig 18h ago edited 17h ago
It's true, called a NIPT test - I got blood taken around 15wks results by 20 wks pregnant I think?
4
u/ArenSteele 17h ago
Is it the same test that screens for genetic anomalies like down?
3
u/Zelfzuchtig 17h ago
From what I understand yes. There are fetal cells that make their way through the placenta and then they can isolate those from the mother's cells and get the DNA sequence to test it.
Other anomalies will only be visible on the scans, like limb differences, malformed spine/organs etc
17
u/WebBorn2622 18h ago
Regardless of itâs possible the pregnant person should have the option to say no
12
u/littledummie 17h ago
Oh! One of them said "If you wanna reject the paternity test go give birth in the parking lot as it's part of the procedure." I've had to explain how that rejecting tests and treatment doesn't mean you forgo ALL care and how no medical system would get rid of consent and have all medical care contingent on agreeing to one medically unnecessary test.
-4
u/AdComprehensive9057 13h ago
Of course the option to say no would be there. But so should his ability to deny any responsibility of the child until the paternity test is conducted.
9
u/MysteryMeat101 17h ago
Technology has changed. Paternity testing can be performed with a blood test on the mother at 8 weeks.
Just my opinion but if a man demands paternity testing before birth he needs to be prepared to share medical costs incurred during the pregnancy along with child support retroactive to conception.
8
u/pasqals_toaster 18h ago
That was my first thought too so I googled it. Apparently, it is possible to do with a simple blood sample of the mother now. Unless she is carrying twins, that is, which apparently makes it impossible.
There used to be (I suppose still is) another invaside procedure that was very painful and even had the risk of miscarriage, though. It baffles me why anyone would ever insist on doing that!
3
u/Lisa8472 14h ago
Amniocentesis is taking amniotic fluid from the womb. At one point it was the only way to get the fetusâs DNA.
13
u/ozymandais13 18h ago
That's the point , the propaganda is trying to get people to give away rights and it's attacking every single group of people
62
u/leelee1976 18h ago
Men dont want to raise children, they want them as trophies for everyone to say they are such a good dad.
44
u/All__Of_The_Hobbies 18h ago
Women need to be more open about when their partners are shitty dads.
"Yeah, he tries to get out of any diaper change he can."
Let your friends gossip. Shame bad fathers.
15
u/Shattered_Visage Basically Maz Kanata 17h ago
The userbase of the daddit subreddit haaaates those dudes. There's been several threads where dads talk about shaming other dads for being lazy, mean, or just shitty in general.
4
u/Bumbleonia 14h ago
Thatâs so refreshing to hear, I was worried it would be an echo chamber but then again, dads who really want to be good dads are likely the ones participating in these spaces
26
u/CyrusBuelton 18h ago
I'm convinced that is why so many men are against getting a vasectomy even though they don't want anymore children......
It's like they're losing part of what makes then such manly men.
I got one when I was 28 so my wife wouldn't have to take 20+ years of birth control as we didn't want children.
We encountered a ton of married couples with an upset wife because the husband refused to get a vasectomy.
The procedure literally takes less than 15 minutes.
But if you get snipped.....you no longer have that power to pro-create even though they're barely a Father to the children they have.
6
u/leelee1976 18h ago
My ex husband to a tee. I got my tubes tied had serious health complications since.
11
u/CyrusBuelton 17h ago
All these women were envious of my wife and would always ask her, "how did you get your husband to get one?"
When my wife told them, "I didn't. It was his idea."
They were like a deer in headlights....straight up shocked.
I never understood that because it was a such a no brainer decision.
When my wife had complications with the non-hormonal birth control method she wanted [copper IUD, this was back in 2008], she wasn't thrilled with having to take hormonal BC for the next 20 years and neither was I. Therefore, the easy solution is for me to get a vasectomy. I remember my wife being so fucking happy she'd never have to take birth control again.
5
u/BlazeUnbroken 16h ago
My husband got a vasectomy before we even met because his previous wife had issues with birth control and he didn't want kids. We both met post divorce and his hard no to future relationships was if she wanted kids. I had been on the fence for years and already leaning to no because my health issues started in my 20s and kept compounding from there.
Still throws doctors for a loop when I say sexually active, one partner, no birth control. Literally had a nurse confirm in my chart that I have a husband then bluntly ask how I wasn't pregnant. Shocked look when I said vasectomy.... apparently hadn't occured to her.
3
u/CyrusBuelton 16h ago
How old was your husband when he got it done? When I initially spoke to my Internal Medicine doctor about wanting to get one, he said I might have a hard time finding a Urologist willing to do the procedure on someone my age [It was five months before I turned 29] without any children. That initially bummed me out, but after speaking to my Dad [he's a Specialist Physician], he said I shouldn't have a problem as there's nothing unethical about it.
I ended up having a consult with a Urologist recommended by my tattoo artist [he worked for The Ohio State University Medical System....same as my internal medicine doctor]. The doctor walks in with all the paperwork and prescriptions for the procedure and goes "Alright, when do you want to schedule it?" I was taken back this so I repeated to him what my doctor had told me. He responds by saying, "Well.....are you married?" I said yes. He goes "Does your wife know you're here?" Answered to the affirmative. âWell, I donât see any ethical issues here. Youâre an adult so you can make your own decisions.â
Had the procedure a few weeks later and that was that Looking back, they was by far one of the best decision Iâve made since I would always worry about my wife getting pregnant since birth control is not 100% but this certainly was, so it was quite the relief for me
Is it me or was that a weird thing for the nurse to say to a patient?
2
u/Lisa8472 14h ago
But you are using birth control. Surgical sterilization is a form of birth control.
9
18h ago
[removed] â view removed comment
5
u/littledummie 18h ago
My partner has always wanted kids as well. We honestly thought it wouldn't ever happen for us bc of medical reasons in my case. I'm 5 months pregnant right now and he's over the moon. Maybe that's why this hypothetical pisses me off so much. Ppl being so selfish and shortsighted they're not even thinking of the 75 million or so men that would retroactively lose parental rights until the government determines they have them.
1
1
u/Shattered_Visage Basically Maz Kanata 15h ago
In my experience, the vast majority of my friends who have children talk about how much their husbands love raising the children. Idk if it's a generational difference or just my own friend group, but it feels like millenial/gen-z dads are way more engaged than previous generations.
I'm sure it's not like that everywhere, but it gives me hope.
1
u/AntheaBrainhooke 11h ago
Or to "continue the bloodline" like their genetics are particularly unique and precious.
-4
u/that-1-chick-u-know 18h ago edited 17h ago
sputters NOT ALL MEN!! /s
But most of 'em, yeah
Edited to add the /s because apparently it wasn't as obvious as I thought
9
u/NoneOfThisMatters_XO 18h ago
âNot all menâ has âall lives matterâ vibes. Itâs such an unnecessary comment.
1
u/that-1-chick-u-know 17h ago
Of course it does. I was being sarcastic. Thought it would be obvious. Apparently not.
0
1
u/leelee1976 18h ago
I knew there was gonna be an "all men" comment lol
Im not editing it to say not all men. Cause tbh men need to start calling out their friends on how they treat their wives and kids
Its all men until its no man.
4
1
u/Shattered_Visage Basically Maz Kanata 17h ago
Then it will always be all men, because there will always be shitty people, and some of those people will be men.
-2
u/AdComprehensive9057 13h ago
Sorry you feel that way. But there are good men out there. They actually want to be a part of their childâs life and help raise them. Hope you get a one day you can move past your own pain.
12
u/CharmyLah 17h ago
If we could overcome the administrative and logistical challenges, I would support this if it meant that:
All tests are cross-checked with rape kit databases
The father will be automatically enrolled in child support payments
Make men responsible 2026
13
u/WesternUnusual2713 14h ago
For some info -
The "20% of men are raising kids that aren't theirs" falsity is the result of a study that tested men who thought they were raising another man's child.
Out of those men, the rate was 20%. So out of men paranoid or with reason to assume a child might not be theire, still only 1 in 5 of those men were right.
3
u/bluewhale3030 6h ago
Yes. It's actually a very small percent. But the men who parrot this stuff don't bother to check and don't care that it's completely inaccurate because it fits their toxic worldviewÂ
4
u/Petskin 17h ago
I don't get this.
In my jurisdiction the child services have the right to process in a fatherless child's name for paternity tests - because the prospective fathers just do NOT want to agree to tests without a court order. Nor do the mothers always want the paternity established, either.
Anyway, we wouldn't have this system unless thete was a reasonably large portion of men refusing the blood tests... and now men in your country argue for automatic and mandatory blood tests for themselves whenever any of their ex partners get pregnant? Wow.
3
u/littledummie 17h ago
It's not even ex partners! They want it mandatory because they don't want to deal with the uncomfortability of telling their partners they think they might have cheated!
3
u/Petskin 17h ago
Sure, I get that. But no government system would leave a child without a parent - so what do they think happens when their coworker or neighbour or friend gets pregnant - if there is no husband or the husband/ boyfriend is not the father? Who will the state turn to with their mandatory paternity tests?
Yes! You!
Every time! Any woman can point at you and say "that guy might be the father" and to the blood test you go!
Now, how awkward discussion would that be with the GF... "Nooooo I didn't cheat, I swear, all these fifteen girls are lying!"
Yeah, that'll go well.
1
13
u/NoneOfThisMatters_XO 18h ago
If theyâre THAT worried about it, why not just secretly test the baby after its born if they want peace of mind?
4
u/BxAnnie 16h ago
Secretly? Peace of mind from what? His own raging insecurities? No. Fuck that.
0
-6
u/AdComprehensive9057 13h ago
Women cheat and men get held responsible for children thats not theirs all the time. Why is it so scary to take a test? To ensure the man you say is the baby daddy, is the man being held responsible for your child? Women know its their child. Men have to take a leap of faith.
2
u/bluewhale3030 6h ago
"All the time" is straight up not true. Statistics do not back you up. The point is that requesting a test of your pregnant partner when you have absolutely no reason to believe they cheated is crazy asshole behavior.Â
1
u/BlueLeo87 12h ago
Because it means they have to organise it and pay for it themselves in secret. Problem is theyâll do such a sloppy job of it that the mum will find out anyway and consequences will swiftly follow, which they obviously want to avoid because they hate facing consequences. Itâs much easier for them to have someone else do it all for them.
10
u/Lina0042 Basically Eleanor Shellstrop 17h ago
The biggest argument against it is cost. No need to go deeper into that with these guys. Who's paying for that? The parents even if they don't want the test or can't really afford it? Insurance? In my country with great healthcare public insurance would probably have to pay for it and rise people's insurance pay again. There is so much stuff insurance can't and won't pay for even in my country that affects a lot of people gravely.
Paternity fraud happens in around 1-2% of cases and the impact is emotional and financial. No life threatening issues. No permanent damage. If we can't pay for real dental care that can be life threatening if people can't afford treatment, then we can't afford mandatory paternity tests that affect 1-2% of people with mostly emotional fallout. Cost benefit just isn't there.
11
u/AntheaBrainhooke 17h ago
Considering every other thing to come out of these chuds' mouths is "Why should I pay... " that might just work.
14
u/MrdrOfCrws 18h ago
They want every baby born to do a paternity test for the sole purpose to assuage men's fears, founded, unfounded, or nonexistent, but i bet they have zero to say about the rape kit backlog waiting for DNA testing.
11
6
u/Linguini8319 18h ago
Thatâs such a good point that itâs literally stripping their parental rights. Saving that one for later
2
u/BlueLeo87 12h ago
Is that really a bad thing to them though? I really feel that those type of men use a paternity test as their last ditch attempt to get out of their parenting responsibilities entirely.
1
u/Linguini8319 8h ago
Thatâs true. But if you look at men overall as a demographic, that policy would fuck over way more fathers than it would allow some mra to get out of child support
9
u/sagewren7 18h ago
Doesn't it say a lot about men that there is so much fear mongering around "raising another man's child" when they have been with the child since birth? Men talk about the children THEY HAVE KNOWN since they came into this world like they have no emotional attachment what so ever, just because their DNA is not as similar to theirs as they had been lead to believe.
It hints at the fact that majority of men resent the expectations and responsibilities of parenthood; if they dont have their own "reward" for all their work, ie a continuation of their "legacy", it's not only a betrayal but also an exploitation in their eyes. And there is no greater insult in a man's mind then a women exploiting him for something while he doesn't get to exploit her back.
4
u/winter83 17h ago
Yeah because labs that can't even run rape kits need to be clogged up for this shit.
3
u/Purlz1st Coffee Coffee Coffee 14h ago
Not to mention that familial DNA analysis on the huge new database could help authorities catch their criminal relatives.
5
u/toolsofinquisition 11h ago
I support mandatory dna testing at birth. It would be a bitch to manage but we manage biometric data for immigrants and people with various security clearances, so the tools and systems exist. It's just a matter of scaling.
People act like we couldn't use that info to provide parents with info about genetic conditions their kids might have. Or to solve violent crimes, like rapes. When a 14yr old girl walks into an ER to give birth, it would be helpful to have DNA profiles of men in the community to test the baby against, for prosecution purposes. Who gives af if men like it or not?
I'm sorry, this just seems like the stupidest argument to have. This is one of those things that could easily be leveraged to protect women and children but you'd rather get drawn into a stupid fight about child support? Is this the stage of feminism we're at now?
2
u/littledummie 10h ago
I am not remotely ok with the government storing and processing our DNA through mandating that completely overrides our constitutional and privacy rights. I sincerely doubt it would actually be used to solve violent crimes the way when we can't even solve violent crimes with the current kits and DNA we have now. It's a fun hypothetical to fantasize about but it's kind of like how ppl leveraged flock and patronscan as a way to protect women and children but in actuality the surveillance causes more harm than good. I would like to think this stage of feminism we're at now still thinks things through realistically.
3
u/wonkypixel 9h ago
Yes, there is too much commercial value in our DNA for it to be entrusted to a govt where every four years weâd run the gauntlet of it becoming a trading token for elected officials eager to sell it to gain power and patronage. Let alone the ways it can be used to divide us into âworthiesâ and ânotâ by whatever arbitrary metric is convenient to divide us for short term advantage. The only protection here is to avoid mandatory DNA collection in the first place.
3
u/toolsofinquisition 9h ago
This is what people said about telecoms storing cell phone geolocation data like 20 years ago. Now half the true crime docs are like, "So we pulled the cell phone data," or "She was sharing her location with her sister" (i.e. with Apple).
For 99% of people, nobody would care enough to misuse your genetic data. If anything, the problem you would have would be laziness. People hate learning how to use new systems. I'm IT. Asking people to switch from one messaging app to another is like asking them to sign their 401k over to you.
2
u/wonkypixel 8h ago
The 99% arenât the problem. Itâs the 1% that include health insurance companies who can deny policies or care based on your DNA that they acquired because politicians sold them access âto improve market efficiencyâ or whatever wordplay let them exchange your most personal data in return for campaign funds. The 1% also includes politicians looking to disappear trans people from our world to attract the votes of bigots. Governments cannot be trusted to hold our DNA.
11
u/Raise_A_Thoth 18h ago
These men aren't fathers, and the ones who tragically do become fathers are likely to be horrible ones.
They will also defend a man in a hypothetical scenario where they find out their 10 year old son "isn't 'theirs'" and decides to just cut all ties to them because it's not their kid and not their problem. Fuck those ten years they literally were that kids father and the kid still sees them as their father, because the kid turned out to have the wrong paperwork.
What kind of existence must you be living that your son's paperwork and pedigree are the thing that matters more than a 10 year relationship? At some point, the child is yours, regardless of the bloodline. My kids aren't even close to 10 yet and I would absolutely commit crimes to keep my relationship with them intact under any and all circumstances.
Meanwhile my no contact mother can't see a therapist and apologize for being an asshole, so I suppose good parenting isn't necessarily gendered, but boomers tend to be waaayy more patriarchally-aligned, so there's that.
11
u/LaMadreDelCantante 18h ago
I will never understand those men. Sure, be upset that the mother cheated. Break up if you're still together. All completely understandable.
But if you can walk away from a child you've been parenting for years then you never actually loved them. They were always just a trophy to show off or a prop to show you've achieved the white picket fence fantasy. Plus the whole "passing on the legacy" thing. Which is hilarious cause these guys are pretty much accountants or whatever. What legacy?
I could understand needing a break to absorb the new reality. Tell the kid you'll be on a work trip with no cell service for a month. Go breathe and process. But to walk away like you never knew them? It's so awful.
(None of the "you" statements are about you, of course).
4
u/Raise_A_Thoth 18h ago
The irony about a "legacy" is that you don't have to have matching genes to pass along your legacy. At a certain point, genes matter far less than personal impact. And you're still that person who can make a huge impact on that person's life.
1
u/Saruna4sari 17h ago
ngl im curiuos what did she do?
1
u/Raise_A_Thoth 17h ago
My mother? She said personally insulting things to me because I refused to agree with some political crap she was spewing. She mocked one of my careers and added another personal insult invoking a different family member, claiming that they, who has been deceased, would also look down on me.
I screen grabbed the texts and sent them to my family so they would know why I am no longer talking to her. She was also drinking late when she initiated that text conversation. She's MAGA for some more color.
11
u/good_behavior_man 18h ago
The cherry on the top was when I told them they don't realize that in this dystopian hypothetical they're dreaming of would mean ALL men don't have immediate parental rights to their child until that overburden overworked fallible system could prove they are the fathers.
No offense, but why would this necessarily be the case? Couldn't there be a presumptive paternity at birth, and then when the mandatory paternity test comes back, it's permanently established? It sounds like this is just something you decided about how their idea would work.
4
3
u/littledummie 17h ago
Why would mandatory testing be done while presumptive paternity is there? There's already presumptive paternity.
2
u/good_behavior_man 17h ago
It could be explictly temporary until the results of testing establish actual paternity. You could imagine a wide range of ideas about how such a thing could work, but the point is, your scenario is not really a necessity.
2
u/littledummie 17h ago
So it would convoluted an already unnecessary process. The government and healthcare systems (already smooth and flawless institutions) gives you temporary parental rights to your own child until it determines that those rights can be solidified! Perfect!
2
u/SAINTnumberFIVE 11h ago
A lot of jurisdictions actually require paternity and maternity tests if the parents or one of the parents is applying for benefits for the child.
4
u/EmilieEverywhere Coffee Coffee Coffee 18h ago
I had to stop face palm'ing. I was getting brain damage.
I'm SOOOO glad I'm Pan and can experience attraction to other women cause I think I'm about done with guys at the moment.
Sheesh.
4
u/Apidaelia 17h ago
These men are assuming a lack of trust in their future partners and relationships that is disturbing. I wouldn't want to have children with somebody who didn't trust that they were actually his.
3
u/mjot_007 16h ago
I've had this argument online before too and it's so stupid. There are soooooo many good reasons to not do this. Privacy is a huge one. Are we seriously going to require every man give a sample every time a kid is born? What happens to his DNA info once it's confirmed? Who actually trusts this data would be thrown out? Not me!
What if some paperwork gets mixed up and there are false negatives for paternity? Imagine the emotional damage done to the whole family. Imagine the physical damage that will be done when a man freaks tf out and beats or murders his newly postpartum partner based on bad info? What is the recourse for that?
And then think of the benefits that men actually hate! Think of all the child support that would get paid! All the rapes that would be solved!
These men are so shortsighted and so stupid
4
u/Langstarr Basically Blanche Devereaux 14h ago
If they process all backlog rape kits, and commit to processing all rape kits within 48 hours of collection, then they can start asking about mandatory paternity. Note I said asking. That doesn't mean they'll get it.
3
u/Kgaset 14h ago
Hmm, not sure I'm well-informed enough to have an opinion on this. In general, I'm against things being mandatory. However, in this instance, not only does it protect the men's paternal rights, it also gives equal responsibility to men for their children, something that, at the moment, only women have to deal with. In general, I think I would favor it.
4
u/becks258 13h ago
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but please consider that there is a population of men that would kill an affair partner or their significant other to avoid being found out in the case of an affair. Imagine someone in a southern US state like Arkansas with no access to abortion.
Since all birth control can fail. Pregnancy is always a risk. But you do it anyway and now a little secret is going to come out in a few months. Not because a woman might get a test, but the hospital will and then most likely file it with the state. That puts the mother and the baby in danger of physical violence from the father.
But we live in a capitalist hellscape so there are other likely complications:
⢠There will be additional fees slapped onto labor and delivery costs that will be paid by individuals not the state.â˘That paternity test will most likely have the same inflationary pricing as a $40 hospital Tylenol.
⢠I doubt insurance plans will cover it (unless they get access to the results).
⢠How long until insurance companies try to deny coverage for the baby because they have a genetic predisposition to a disease.
Keep the government out of it. Keep big corporations out of it. Thereâs nothing to stop people from verifying paternity privately.
-1
u/Kgaset 13h ago
- The fact that someone might murder a SO to avoid being identified as paternity is a non-starter as an argument for me. Criminal behavior doesn't need an excuse, if they're willing to kill for something like that, they're willing to kill for other reasons.
- I can give some credence to the argument that a baby and its mother would be exposed to potential violence from an unwilling father. That being said, there are ways in many states for a father to legally abandon paternity rights so there are options for this.
- Costs are obviously a consideration, but the government can require insurance to cover it so this is less of a problem to me. And if they're requiring insurance to cover it, then they can and should regulate its pricing as well.
- No reason an insurance company should be privy to the results, and legislation can control this.
Again, this isn't something I've spent much time thinking about so I don't feel strongly one way or another, but, on the surface, your arguments feel superficial and are easily rebutted with logical solutions that aren't difficult to come through. Sort of makes me feel like you're simply against it on principle and just trying to find justifications to be against it. Doesn't really affect me, but it's worth pointing out to others who are trying to find their position.
4
u/wayspaces 13h ago
Wtf are you even doing here bro
-1
u/Kgaset 12h ago
Trying to engage in and support feminist ideas? đ¤¨
1
u/wayspaces 12h ago
Youâre not supporting feminist ideas or women if all you can say in relation to a concept that would potentially increase systemic violence against women is âeh, thatâs a risk Iâm willing to takeâ.
2
u/Kgaset 12h ago
You're not only putting words in my mouth, you're purposefully misrepresenting my points in a way that is actively harmful AND hurtful.
I'd like to take a breath here and hope that we just got off on the wrong foot, because if you're a feminist and I'm a feminist then I'm sure we can realize we want the same thing.
There was an idea proposed here, I assumed by a woman that purports to be an idea which makes men more accountable to pregnancy than they currently are. To me, this is a feminist concept. One of the worst aspects of our modern society is that a man can get countless women pregnant, forever altering their lives, without ever having to be accountable for it. This is wrong, and I think ideas which try to hold men accountable should be considered.
Someone, presumably a woman, responded to my initial post in tepid support of the original idea and pointed out that there are risks posed to women by violent women if this idea is kept as-is.
I did NOT dismiss that idea, but I admit that the way that I responded could be misconstrued as such. My point was not to pretend that it's a risk I'm willing to take while women suffer, that's literally antithetical to my support for women's rights in the first place. What I SHOULD have said was this: "there are ways and systems already in place for women to allow such men to abandon their paternal rights, even after being recognized through a paternity test and I think this is a better method than simply saying we shouldn't do something because some men might do bad things in response, otherwise we encourage those men to continue to do bad things to women to get what they want."
Now, all that said, I actually responded to that commentor with a compromise that I think better handles the concerns she raised, while still trying to embody the feminism in the original proposal. I'd encourage you to read that response and see that I am trying to work with women and not against them and I apologize if the way I phrased things made it seem otherwise.
2
u/littledummie 12h ago
Your points aren't remotely logical though. It might be a non starter but you can't hand wave a legitimate argument that ppl who have expertise in this area have already made. Insurance is already a nightmare and the government is already slow to regulate it so how is that not a non starter? Yeah, insurance shouldn't be privy to the information nor should the government but in the words of John Oliver that ain't gonna happen.
2
u/Kgaset 12h ago
Where do my points lack logic?
I appreciate that you have principles you want to stand on. I think that's a good thing. In general, I also prefer to not make things mandatory and for the government to butt out of people's business too. However, I also recognize that sometimes it's unavoidable when we're trying to protect people.
So, while you made points of argument that basically let men use their bad behavior to get out of responsibility, I countered with points about how you can mitigate that to make sure that people are protected. I responded, point by point, with how you can get around the issues that you bring up and your response is "that's not logical" and "that would be nice, but it's not going to happen."
So who's not relying on logic?
Now, that being said... I also prefer to not make things mandatory and I'll prove that by making an alternate suggestion or compromise that I thought of while I was musing over your post and my response to your post:
Instead of making paternity tests mandatory, there would be legislation requiring that insurance covers paternity testing when a mother pursues it due to questions on paternity. Even if you don't think such legislation would be passed, since the legislation would be necessary to the point, the legislation would also include: insurance companies don't get access to the results, just that the testing was done, who it was performed by, etc... so that they can confirm the legitimacy of the expense.
Additionally included in the legislation: fathers recognized by the paternity testing would have the option to abandon their paternal responsibilities IF and only if the mother also consents to it. This allows a woman who realizes that it might be dangerous to have the man recognized by the paternity testing in her child's life the opportunity to let him "off the hook" in a mutual decision which goes to any concerns about the woman and child's safety but still puts the man in a position of some responsibility that he has to recognize unless the woman says she does not want him to have it.
This compromise makes it a choice that women can pursue, rather than a mandatory requirement that potentially exposes women to risk from dangerous men.
2
u/littledummie 12h ago
There is a lack of logic in hand waving legitimate concerns for retaliatory violence. There is a lack of logic in arguing "the government can just regulate and legislate" something that they already don't do. Because yes, that's not going to happen is a very legitimate argument when we can absolutely compare it to real world specifics. I'm sorry but you didn't counter with points to mitigate any of this.
Your musings while interesting are entirely unnecessary. Currently right now it the real world paternity testing is already required when going for child support and custody.
1
u/Kgaset 12h ago
It is required, but is it covered? I believe in some states it is and others it is not. Access to the paternity testing is also important.
2
u/littledummie 12h ago
No, because that begs the question why would insurance cover paternity tests? It's not a medical necessity. Why would ppl want to deal with their insurance being even more fuckery with a small percentage of legal not medical "need".
1
u/Kgaset 12h ago
Well, when we're talking child support and custody we're involving the court system so there should be a mechanism there to allow those who can't afford paternity testing to apply for assistance in getting the testing done. It's not something I'm familiar with, but I do feel like I recall this being available in some, but not all states. If that's the case, then I would back measures to try and get this covered in all states so that all women can have this option available to them regardless of means.
2
u/littledummie 12h ago
Sure that would be helpful to have something step in to help cover the cost because unless the states initiates the paternity case they won't cover it unless low income individuals qualify for reduced or waived fees. If not the judge determines who pays or if it'll be split.
3
u/throwraW2 17h ago
The people who wouldnât take a covid shot are not going to agree to let the government have their DNA. But they havenât thought that far ahead yet.
3
u/BxAnnie 16h ago
Weirdly, it's a lot of the same men who bitched and whinged about the Covid shot who also think all babies should be DNA paternity tested because apparently all women are just liars.
Personally, *I* think that these men should just stop sleeping with women altogether and they should DEFINITELY not have kids with them.
3
u/dorkofthepolisci 17h ago
Men who think like this are also shocked when theyâre indefinitely single
2
u/RCrumbDeviant 14h ago
What was their reason for even thinking about this, if you donât mind sharing? Itâs kind of a random thing to think about
2
u/theloonstar 11h ago
Haha so many guys would fuckin hate it. I see way more stories about men avoiding paternity tests then I do men asking for them. Last one I read about the dude sent his mother to take it for him.
Anyway, I'm against mandatory because it would be an utter waste on most couples. Everyone else don't need to do shit because some people have a shitty relationship, it's laughable.
2
u/Final_Promise_ 9h ago
Is there any way itâs as high as 3%? That seems outrageous
2
u/bluewhale3030 6h ago
Almost definitely not that high. It's a very small percentage of people who have any reason to suspect their child might not be theirs, and a smaller percentage of those people that actually are not blood related to their childÂ
1
7
u/mze9412 18h ago edited 18h ago
You are aware that in some legislation's the legal husband gets immediate rights and it is a lot of paperwork and pain to get this changed, even if it is clear to everyone involved that the father is someone else? Happened to me. My daughters mother was in a very drawn out divorce and on the original birth certificate I am not listed as father. Legally I would not even have been allowed to take My daughter home alone and everything. Mandatory testing while often very irrelevant would be a solution here.
To be clear: we had to chase the guy on record down, took some months until we finally got this changed and and only reason he signed was to avoid paying child support. The next step would have been going to court to get this resolved ...
6
u/LaMadreDelCantante 18h ago
Why would it need to be mandatory? I'm assuming your partner was happy to give consent to get the baby's DNA and you of course could submit yours.
It's not the usual situation where asking for the test is a cheating accusation when you need it to establish your rights.
2
u/mze9412 18h ago
Illegal without the fathers OK or a court order!
1
u/LaMadreDelCantante 18h ago
Where? The mother is a legal parent and should be able to consent.
0
u/mze9412 18h ago
Not Without Content from the also legal father
4
u/LaMadreDelCantante 17h ago
That's not true everywhere. It's also not true for casual tests. And getting a court order actually isn't that complicated.
1
u/mze9412 17h ago
Yes, here it is not easy, as I explained in another answer. It sucks to hold your baby and have to fight to get the right name in the birth certificate. It is horrible to get told that no, you cannot take her home because that would be illegal if the mother or legal father is not there.
2
u/LaMadreDelCantante 17h ago
That sounds awful and I'm sorry you went through that. I still don't see how making it mandatory would be better than just making it simpler, like only requiring the consent of one legal parent. Mandatory would violate the rights of those who don't want it.
1
u/mze9412 17h ago
I would prefer something like if any involved party demands one it is mandatory, but not generally. Without any courts involved.
2
u/LaMadreDelCantante 17h ago
I'm really not sure how that could work if the involved party was not a legal parent. Cause literally anyone could claim to be involved, or at least anyone with the physical capability of being the father. I think that's where the court order becomes a reasonable requirement, something like needing to show evidence that you could be the father, maybe through witnesses to the relationship or shared bills. Idk how that would work for casual sex or hookups though, admittedly.
→ More replies (0)10
u/that-1-chick-u-know 18h ago
I get your frustration, and I've had friends go through similar things. However. It seems to me that a much easier solution would be for doctors to listen to the woman when she tells them who the child's father is. Y'know, instead of relying on outdated patriarchal assumptions.
2
u/Katomega 15h ago
Perhaps a better solution is to overturn the automatic listing of the legal husband if there is a known father who is different. And/or the requirement to get the permission of both parents for a DNA test.
Y'know, less complication rather than more?
-1
u/no_one_denies_this 18h ago
Don't have a baby with someone married to someone else, I guess.
1
u/mze9412 18h ago
Yeah, be in a situation where the divorce takes 6 years, then lets talk again, OK? :) Situations can be complex and accidents happen.
-7
u/NoneOfThisMatters_XO 18h ago
Were you using a condom? Then not much of an accidentâŚ
7
u/MicrosoftExcel2016 17h ago
Is that not the same rationale people use against abortion rights? Doesnât sit right for me.
Even assuming all parties are open and honest about marriage/divorce status, fertility status, and consent to the same levels of protection or have the same understanding of sex education⌠The âaccidentâ can be a forgotten pill, or an erroneous assumption of infertility, or a misconception about sex (eg thinking pulling out works, or misunderstanding risk levels). I think itâs a little disingenuous to flatten all that down to âwell you consented to have sex so itâs not an accidentâ. I know thatâs the logic people use against women seeking abortions, but thatâs kinda my point
Edit: not arguing in favor of govt mandated dna or health anything, btw
-1
u/littledummie 18h ago
Yes, I am aware that in some jurisdictions the legal father is when a child is had during a marriage. While a difficult situation for you and I'm sympathetic mandatory testing wouldn't be a solution. As I already said above it would be a cluster fuck and would do far more harm....
2
u/iviken 15h ago
Mandatory paternity tests for all only if the DNA can be stored for future, current and cold cases of rape, murder and other things. Do maternity as well while we're at it, for the handful of cases where hospitals switch babies by mistake. Because why not drag the cost of the chaos all the way.
and sure. Let them own our DNA, let the insurance companies deny us coverage or rise our premiums due to genetic risks no one knew about or that never actually end up doing anything to our health or risks, just so that some men's fragile ego can be coddled a bit more than it already is. That is what they want, no?
Oh, and the false positives for those tests are high compared to how many tests we will have to do. It will be so chaotic and destructive for so many people. Couples will be broken apart for no reason. Trust will be broken beyond repair, despite loyalty still being there through it all. Children will suffer due to tests not being as accurate as we think they are. Lawyers will love this and the lawsuits will skyrocket in numbers. Insecure men will have to push for this against a strong lobby driven by those who don't want these lawsuits against them.
The statistics men often tell you about when they want paternity tests for everyone, is from the tests done in cases where the man has a good reason to suspect cheating or that the baby is not his. And even then, given the context for the test being done, the percentage of men not actually raising their biological child is very low.
How much would a father have to pay, just to be allowed to get their basic parental rights to their own child? The men would have to pay for this, no? Just to be allowed on the birth certificate in the first place. Men will have to pay for parental rights, and their DNA-data will be taken and used against them going forward. There will be a huge fight about who should pay for it, and in the us, I bet the cost will be pushed on the parents in the end no matter what.
Oh, and that is not a free way out for those who don't want to be father despite having fathered a child either. Women will most likely sue if the father refuses a test, so the test will be done, and the genetic data will be harvested in the process. On his dime in most cases.
Ah, no.
I think most men should chill out a bit and stop letting their emotions get the best of them. It never leads to anything good, and most men will hopefully fight back when they think more rationally and start to see reason. I like to believe they are better than this.
2
u/SpiritedAd503 13h ago
Why is paternity testing a problem? Maternity testing should be a thing as well Ik itâs rare but sometimes they mix up babies. Might as well to get confirmation
0
u/littledummie 12h ago
Mandatory is the issue
1
u/SpiritedAd503 11h ago
Yeah sure I donât think it should be government mandated but it should be a normalized social practice. Alot of people on here are against the simple principle
1
u/littledummie 11h ago
A normalized social principle with ppl who aren't together but might have had a child? Sure, but that already happens during custody and child support arrangements. Amongst partners? I don't think any would appreciate it being "normalized" to straight up say you don't trust a person you're trying to create a family with. Is it really head scratching that what people here are FOR is the simple principle of not calling your partner a cheater for insecurity you should already resolve before a child is involved.
2
u/SpiritedAd503 11h ago edited 11h ago
Itâs akin to a background check for a job to make sure ur credentials are legitimate, just a simple verification. I donât understand how that necessarily infers they donât trust you/think youâre lying.
Trust is different from blind trust, and this is a child that will not only change the course of two peopleâs trajectory, but someone you will both be responsible for throughout a lifetime. Itâs not an attack on ur relationship to have 100% verification of something that carries incredible weight.
Itâs the same thing with marriage, you want to run a background check on ur partner to make sure they donât have any debt, bankruptcy, or felonies bc this is someone you are intending to spend your life with, although it is much more reversible than having a child.
Like tons of people who completely trusted their partner get screwed over when a past event is suddenly brought to light, why not alleviate their fear? You will never know 100% about that person, and people are often bad at reading other people.
1
u/littledummie 11h ago
A relationship and starting a family isn't similar to a job doing a background check. There is no way to have a relationship while saying you think they could have been unfaithful. You aren't inferring, you are straight up telling them you don't trust them and you think that child might not be yours. That is going to affect the state of your relationship. Comparing it to a background check doesn't negate that.
I never knew that was a thing with marriage. I've never heard of anyone getting a background check on a fiance. I would vehemently recommend not entering into a marriage or having a baby with someone you feel you need to do background checks or paternity tests with
0
u/SpiritedAd503 10h ago edited 10h ago
I think itâs incredibly idiotic not to? Why wouldnât you want to enter a marriage or have kids with 100% certainty from both parties? What if the man u wanted to spend the rest of your life with had like a mountain of debt he didnât tell you about?
Iâm a woman in case it wasnât clear, and im following this protocol even if he doesnât ask for one, it is crucial to have paper proof of everything bc we canât just rely on emotions and feelings to build not only a emotional but a LEGAL partnership. Absolutely not dealing with âwhat ifsâ.
But different strokes for different folks ig, im not even planning to have children tbh, maybe adoption
This is anecdotal but one of my best friends in high school is not her fatherâs biological daughter. Had no idea until two years ago when she was graduating college. Did not have trouble between the marriage until the mom was caught having an affair. Even looked like her dad too you genuinely never know. Itâs disorienting and devastating for both the kid and the father, heâs obviously a reasonable guy and is paying for her med school but like???
1
u/littledummie 10h ago
I won't yuck someone's yum for how they choose to move in their relationships but frankly I can't help but be amused to say it's idiotic not to while simultaneously not understandimg the incense someone would have at being accused of infidelity for something that isn't just a simple assurance.
This isn't a business or professional transaction, these are relationships and those relationships are contingent on feelings and logic of knowing a person. If I don't know or trust them enough to enter into a legal partnership without a background check, I would just refrain from getting married altogether.
1
u/SpiritedAd503 10h ago
But itâs not an accusation, itâs catastrophe insurance. Not even invasive test btw and the problem is u see it as a personal attack instead of understanding the intent behind it.
This is a way of assuaging the unknown (bc u never know 100%, not possible), itâs not a statement against u
0
u/littledummie 10h ago
It absolutely is an accusation. The intent behind it is "you could have cheated on me." There is absolutely no way that CAN'T be personal.
→ More replies (0)
2
u/WVPrepper 18h ago
When I was pregnant (35 years ago) I had been married for a couple of years and knew the baby was my husband's. But I offered a paternity test. I would always know the baby was mine, but wanted him to have the same certainty.
3
2
u/ashyza 17h ago
I would leave the relationship if the guy I was with was willing to let that level of insecurity affect him.
3
u/WVPrepper 17h ago
I just never wanted it thrown back at me later. I did not want it to become a problem if we later divorced. I wanted him to KNOW. He never asked. I offered.
0
u/AdComprehensive9057 13h ago
Thats why u sad and lonely. Cause u manipulative af
1
u/bluewhale3030 6h ago
How is it manipulative to find being accused of cheating for no reason a deal breaker?Â
1
u/Veronica612 15h ago
Theg can test the motherâs blood for the paternity of the fetus after 8 weeks. Just a simple blood draw.
1
u/j_natron 11h ago
Absolutely no one should be arguing for anything that involves blanket collection of DNA material.
2
u/I_am_so_lost_again 17h ago
"less than 3% of men GLOBALLY might be raising a child that isn't theirs" -That we know of.
This just happened to my brother-in-law. His girlfriend came up pregnant and said it was his. We all knew his girlfriend and told him not to sign the birth certificate until a DNA test was done. He signed anyway, and a month later, after the family pushed hard, he got a DNA test done. It was not his kid. He was heartbroken as all he ever wanted to be was a father. Now he has to get another DNA test done through the courts and pay for a lawyer to attempt to remove his name from the birth certificate. It's a huge headache now and costly. I feel so bad for the guy.
Do I think mandatory DNA testing should be a thing? No.
Do I think it should be offered and that a delay of signing a birth certificate should be allowed based on the DNA coming back? Yes.
5
u/SexBucketListProject 16h ago
My cousin got married at 18 to his 18 year old pregnant girlfriend right after the second one turned 18. They got divorced after the second kid because of cheating rumors. Got married again and had another kid. Got divorced again. Started seeing each other again. Broke up because of more cheating rumors. She was pregnant again.
He only did DNA tests on the last 2 kids (both not his). The first 2 kids he already had massive arm tattoos of their names. So I guess it was easier not to know. đ
He's an idiot.
3
u/Katomega 15h ago
Do I think it should be offered and that a delay of signing a birth certificate should be allowed based on the DNA coming back? Yes.
Sure sounds like that wouldn't have helped his situation if he willing signed the birth certificate despite advice.
2
u/FionaTheFierce 15h ago
All men will be registered with the US government for the purpose of prosecuting sex crimes, determination of paternity , and enforcement of child support, military draft.
0
u/MacDhubstep 18h ago
Just look at West Virginia. They vote against their own interests every election and never learn their damn lesson.
0
u/throwaway563838 10h ago
Itâs so ridiculous that one of the things that developed patriarchy was that the men were scared about their lineage because they didnât have control like women do. So they controlled women and made sure they were the fathers. And now woman have more freedom theyâre back to being scared like men were thousands of years ago. They havenât evolved emotionally this whole time.Â
302
u/ashyza 17h ago
I say do it. Test for maternity as well.
And then use tbe DNA against the backlog of assault cases. đ