Mandatory paternity testing

[Galloism]

Hacking the system and changing the data so a person allergic to antibiotics will receive antibiotics, health insurance companies deciding not to give you health insurance, hacking the system to trick a person into fatherhood .

Typically one wouldn't add it to a database, just give the results of the test to the parents (like we would do now).

At least, I would hope it wouldn't be added to a database.

[Thepeopl]

You're talking like women decide who to claim is the father because they think they can get some men to... what? Pay extra? Bribe them to remain silent? Originally you were talking about child support. Is US child support based on income?

I'm introducing you to the very strange concept that some people have more money than others.

Making a coherent and valid argument would be a nice help, but I'm not holding my breath.

Or perhaps you could actually read what I'm saying instead of inserting your lack of understanding into it.

And here you're presuming that all women are inherently untrustworthy and should automatically be suspected of infidelity or fraud (And sloppy of me to forget that option before). It's libellous based solely on gender, and inherently demean their reputation, which is discriminatory towards women. I.e. it's a transgression against the rights of women. That was your original question. Your oft-repeated misogynistic "arguments" aside (Whether you wish to phrase it as just an outcome of your philosophy or not), discrimination normally not legal.

Uh-huh. So explain to me how "Trust, but verify" presumes that are women are libelous? See, this is you doing that thing again where your interject your own lack of understanding into the argument. I'm not saying all women are liars. I just prefer it that men don't end up with children that aren't theirs.

So you want to be checked upon as well? Because:Trust but verify. If you say you go out with the boys, should she have a spy cam on you so she can verify you actually went out with the boys and didn't cheat / lie?

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

I'm introducing you to the very strange concept that some people have more money than others.


Or perhaps you could actually read what I'm saying instead of inserting your lack of understanding into it.


Uh-huh. So explain to me how "Trust, but verify" presumes that are women are libelous? See, this is you doing that thing again where your interject your own lack of understanding into the argument. I'm not saying all women are liars. I just prefer it that men don't end up with children that aren't theirs.

So you want to be checked upon as well? Because:Trust but verify. If you say you go out with the boys, should she have a spy cam on you so she can verify you actually went out with the boys and didn't cheat / lie?

Spy cams would find out a lot more than where he went. It'd include what he said, when he said it, to whom he said it, and a variety of such things other than adultery.

Paternity tests only check one thing; whether or not the kid is actually his.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Mandatory slut-shaming and discrimination is neither privilege nor right.

Well, if neither side has any rights pertinent to that dilemma, whose interests should take priority? Those of children who could be deceived about who their fathers are through no fault of their own, or of mothers who have nothing to fear from a paternity test?

So... still discriminatory?

Bullshit. If there is no male equivalent of something, there is no metric on which to evaluate whether it constitues discrimination or not, because there's no metric of what constitutes doing the "same thing" to males.

No. You're slut-shaming all women as you presume the need to test all women, regardless of circumstance, for their honesty or fidelity. Built into your proposal is the assumption that all women will cheat, have a baby and them blame someone else to leech them of their money.

Pure strawman. More like there's SOME who will, just like there's SOME people who will break into your house or SOME people who will try to mug you in the street, so we take precautions.

If anything, women who DON'T cheat (or who are promiscuous but honest about it) will have the advantage here, as cheaters will be exposed and men who DO value monogamy will know who to avoid, improving the average dating success of other women. So why oppose this, unless you have something to hide?

Come back to me when you have a comparison within the realms of sanity.

That doesn't refute it.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

The only time I’d be for paternity tests is when there is a strong reason to have one: finding if a child belongs to one of the parents, to find a lost parent or when a parent is refusing to take responsibility for a child. Other than that, nope.

May I add, contested inheritances seem to be grounds enough, as many people "know" their kids were from a prior relationship and affair, and subsequently deny them their due.

That’s more than likely a good reason to, yes.

[Hirota]

It seems every time a guy asks his girlfriend for a paternity test, she takes it personally. And any time he doesn't, his rationalization is "I know my own girlfriend."

Well, that's what they all say.

Why could anyone in this day and age still object to mandatory paternity testing? If it's the law, it applies to everyone, and therefore, no one has any excuse to take it personally. Why not find out who the father really is, rather than assuming for no reason that whoever arbitrarily thinks he's the father must be the father?

Personally, I'm all for paternity testing because the truth must come out. We must not rely on the kinds of assumptions that have fallen through before.

I think we need more evidence on how widespread paternal fraud really is before we start proposing policies. Most of the studies have a wide range of variation in their methodology and results.

[Caracasus]

Honestly, it's a bit like when people hire PI's to try and seduce or spy on a suspected unfaithful partner. If it's gotten to the point where you feel you need a paternity test for no other reason than to confirm you're the father then frankly you should probably call it quits on the relationship. Either you're right to have doubts and she's shagged anything with a pulse in a 10 mile radius or you were dead wrong, in which case the results won't satisfy your insecurities and paranoia and you'll probably drive the relationship apart.

[Galloism]

It seems every time a guy asks his girlfriend for a paternity test, she takes it personally. And any time he doesn't, his rationalization is "I know my own girlfriend."

Well, that's what they all say.

Why could anyone in this day and age still object to mandatory paternity testing? If it's the law, it applies to everyone, and therefore, no one has any excuse to take it personally. Why not find out who the father really is, rather than assuming for no reason that whoever arbitrarily thinks he's the father must be the father?

Personally, I'm all for paternity testing because the truth must come out. We must not rely on the kinds of assumptions that have fallen through before.

I think we need more evidence on how widespread paternal fraud really is before we start proposing policies. Most of the studies have a wide range of variation in their methodology and results.

I wonder how we would do that. I mean, if it weren't for those ethics things, we could just do it without telling anybody, but the review board might call foul on that study.

If you ask people if you can perform paternity tests for free, you'll likely get substantial selection effects.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

It seems every time a guy asks his girlfriend for a paternity test, she takes it personally. And any time he doesn't, his rationalization is "I know my own girlfriend."

Well, that's what they all say.

Why could anyone in this day and age still object to mandatory paternity testing? If it's the law, it applies to everyone, and therefore, no one has any excuse to take it personally. Why not find out who the father really is, rather than assuming for no reason that whoever arbitrarily thinks he's the father must be the father?

Personally, I'm all for paternity testing because the truth must come out. We must not rely on the kinds of assumptions that have fallen through before.

I think we need more evidence on how widespread paternal fraud really is before we start proposing policies. Most of the studies have a wide range of variation in their methodology and results.

So the one thing that would reliably determine the commonality of paternity fraud is held back by the fact that we don't know how common it is. Seems suspiciously convenient.

[Rojava Free State]

How about we respect people's rights to not have their DNA taken from them without their consent

[Napkizemlja]

Honestly, it's a bit like when people hire PI's to try and seduce or spy on a suspected unfaithful partner. If it's gotten to the point where you feel you need a paternity test for no other reason than to confirm you're the father then frankly you should probably call it quits on the relationship. Either you're right to have doubts and she's shagged anything with a pulse in a 10 mile radius or you were dead wrong, in which case the results won't satisfy your insecurities and paranoia and you'll probably drive the relationship apart.

What about doing it for equality purposes?

[Thepeopl]

Honestly, it's a bit like when people hire PI's to try and seduce or spy on a suspected unfaithful partner. If it's gotten to the point where you feel you need a paternity test for no other reason than to confirm you're the father then frankly you should probably call it quits on the relationship. Either you're right to have doubts and she's shagged anything with a pulse in a 10 mile radius or you were dead wrong, in which case the results won't satisfy your insecurities and paranoia and you'll probably drive the relationship apart.

What about doing it for equality purposes?

What equality purposes?

Just because the woman knows 100% sure it is hers man should too? And what of the caesarean? Than both parents have the DNA tested?

[Caracasus]

Honestly, it's a bit like when people hire PI's to try and seduce or spy on a suspected unfaithful partner. If it's gotten to the point where you feel you need a paternity test for no other reason than to confirm you're the father then frankly you should probably call it quits on the relationship. Either you're right to have doubts and she's shagged anything with a pulse in a 10 mile radius or you were dead wrong, in which case the results won't satisfy your insecurities and paranoia and you'll probably drive the relationship apart.

What about doing it for equality purposes?

What? Well I guess if both parties are paranoid insecure people who equally distrust each other I guess it'd make for good reality TV?

[Galloism]

What about doing it for equality purposes?

What? Well I guess if both parties are paranoid insecure people who equally distrust each other I guess it'd make for good reality TV?

I mean, it's a little bit like the current paradigm where we mandate by law that insurance must cover basically every kind of birth control for women, but no birth control of any sort for men. This was argued in favor of due to women's unique biology, where a pregnancy harms her more than a man.

This is viewed by said proponents as equality - correcting for a biological inequality.

If that's the version of equality you subscribe to, then yes - free paternity tests would be a form of correcting a biological inequality, as a woman can be certain of her parentage, but a man cannot.

[Caracasus]

What? Well I guess if both parties are paranoid insecure people who equally distrust each other I guess it'd make for good reality TV?

I mean, it's a little bit like the current paradigm where we mandate by law that insurance must cover basically every kind of birth control for women, but no birth control of any sort for men. This was argued in favor of due to women's unique biology, where a pregnancy harms her more than a man.

This is viewed by said proponents as equality - correcting for a biological inequality.

If that's the version of equality you subscribe to, then yes - free paternity tests would be a form of correcting a biological inequality, as a woman can be certain of her parentage, but a man cannot.

Ah different countries. Over here you can get rubbers for free and vasectomies via sexual health clinics and a buncha other places and/or the NHS.

[Attempted Socialism]

You're talking like women decide who to claim is the father because they think they can get some men to... what? Pay extra? Bribe them to remain silent? Originally you were talking about child support. Is US child support based on income?

I'm introducing you to the very strange concept that some people have more money than others.

And I'm trying to ask how on Earth that's relevant, because otherwise we can skip to the next part...

Making a coherent and valid argument would be a nice help, but I'm not holding my breath.

Or perhaps you could actually read what I'm saying instead of inserting your lack of understanding into it.

... where your arguments are either shit or incoherent, which makes it fairly hard to understand what you're saying...

And here you're presuming that all women are inherently untrustworthy and should automatically be suspected of infidelity or fraud (And sloppy of me to forget that option before). It's libellous based solely on gender, and inherently demean their reputation, which is discriminatory towards women. I.e. it's a transgression against the rights of women. That was your original question. Your oft-repeated misogynistic "arguments" aside (Whether you wish to phrase it as just an outcome of your philosophy or not), discrimination normally not legal.

Uh-huh. So explain to me how "Trust, but verify" presumes that are women are libelous?

... though sometimes it's also due to you not understanding what I write, or the words you use yourself. Such as here, where you mistake your presumptions that are libellous towards women for women being libellous themselves. You're also not accurately describing your own argument, since it's not "trust but verify"; rather it's "discriminate, transgress, assume the worst of every woman on Earth, presume that every man is as misogynistic as I am, conclude that men who don't need paternity testing really ought to want them anyway, and force a shit policy on everyone".

See, this is you doing that thing again where your interject your own lack of understanding into the argument. I'm not saying all women are liars. I just prefer it that men don't end up with children that aren't theirs.

This is why you ought to take a look at the foundations of your opinions. Yes, the basis for your belief is that all women are suspected of lying to the degree where paternity testing every newborn is a sound and necessary reaction. In your imagined world, every woman is sleeping around so much that you can never trust her concerning something as momentous as the father of her child. If you thought that some women would be lying and, thus, men suspicious under the specific circumstances should have access to paternity testing, you could claim your belief as you do. With what you've been saying, you're either not aware of the implications of the argument you're trying to put forth, or you're not ready to admit to it.

[Galloism]

I mean, it's a little bit like the current paradigm where we mandate by law that insurance must cover basically every kind of birth control for women, but no birth control of any sort for men. This was argued in favor of due to women's unique biology, where a pregnancy harms her more than a man.

This is viewed by said proponents as equality - correcting for a biological inequality.

If that's the version of equality you subscribe to, then yes - free paternity tests would be a form of correcting a biological inequality, as a woman can be certain of her parentage, but a man cannot.

Ah different countries. Over here you can get rubbers for free and vasectomies via sexual health clinics and a buncha other places and/or the NHS.

Yeah. Ours doesn't do that.

Explicitly.

Covered contraceptive methods
FDA-approved contraceptive methods prescribed by a woman’s doctor are covered, including:

Barrier methods, like diaphragms and sponges
Hormonal methods, like birth control pills and vaginal rings
Implanted devices, like intrauterine devices (IUDs)
Emergency contraception, like Plan B® and ella®
Sterilization procedures
Patient education and counseling

Plans aren’t required to cover drugs to induce abortions and services for male reproductive capacity, like vasectomies.

https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/bir ... -benefits/

That's a government website, btw.

[Caracasus]

Ah different countries. Over here you can get rubbers for free and vasectomies via sexual health clinics and a buncha other places and/or the NHS.

Yeah. Ours doesn't do that.

Explicitly.

Covered contraceptive methods
FDA-approved contraceptive methods prescribed by a woman’s doctor are covered, including:

Barrier methods, like diaphragms and sponges
Hormonal methods, like birth control pills and vaginal rings
Implanted devices, like intrauterine devices (IUDs)
Emergency contraception, like Plan B® and ella®
Sterilization procedures
Patient education and counseling

Plans aren’t required to cover drugs to induce abortions and services for male reproductive capacity, like vasectomies.

https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/bir ... -benefits/

That's a government website, btw.

Jeessuuss... you people really should get an NHS.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Yeah. Ours doesn't do that.

Explicitly.



https://www.healthcare.gov/coverage/bir ... -benefits/

That's a government website, btw.

Jeessuuss... you people really should get an NHS.

I wished they did. But many in the US are against it under who the fuck knows what actual reason.

[Ostroeuropa]

If you trick a man into raising a child that isn't his, that either always constitutes abuse by virtue of the act itself, or usually constitutes reproductive abuse in that it will inevitably involve gaslighting most men for a sustained period if they have any suspicions.

Arguably true.

I'd argue it also counts as a mental-health prevention thing, given the risks discovery later on down the line has, and so on.

I'm not sure that's a reasonable mental health prevention thing. Mandatory marriage counseling before getting marriage would probably have some mental health prevention things down the road, but it would be an intrusion all the same.

Proportionality of the intrusion though dude. Paternity testing is a swab that takes under 5 minutes for the patient.

[Galloism]

Jeessuuss... you people really should get an NHS.

This is true, yes.

But more to the point, depending on your view of equality, you could argue free/mandatory paternity tests are simply correcting a biological equality of men and women.

I go back and forth on equality measures that correct for biology. On the one hand, everyone deserves a fair shake - regardless of what biology they happen to be born with. On the other, there's some really really shady attempts to correct for biological inequality out there (instituting structural inequality to correct for biological equality.... it's hard).

[Drystar]

It seems every time a guy asks his girlfriend for a paternity test, she takes it personally. And any time he doesn't, his rationalization is "I know my own girlfriend."

Well, that's what they all say.

Why could anyone in this day and age still object to mandatory paternity testing? If it's the law, it applies to everyone, and therefore, no one has any excuse to take it personally. Why not find out who the father really is, rather than assuming for no reason that whoever arbitrarily thinks he's the father must be the father?

Personally, I'm all for paternity testing because the truth must come out. We must not rely on the kinds of assumptions that have fallen through before.

I’m curious why people keep coming up with solutions for things that aren’t really a problem. If you want one, take one. If not why force society to have to bend to someone’s baby drama. As long as some person loves the kid, shouldn’t that be enough?

[Happsborough]

It seems every time a guy asks his girlfriend for a paternity test, she takes it personally. And any time he doesn't, his rationalization is "I know my own girlfriend."

Well, that's what they all say.

Why could anyone in this day and age still object to mandatory paternity testing? If it's the law, it applies to everyone, and therefore, no one has any excuse to take it personally. Why not find out who the father really is, rather than assuming for no reason that whoever arbitrarily thinks he's the father must be the father?

Personally, I'm all for paternity testing because the truth must come out. We must not rely on the kinds of assumptions that have fallen through before.

y tho. Like, seriously, there's 0 reason for this, especially if both parties KNOW who the father is and are reasonably or mostly sure, why would they? This should only be a thing if there is some kind of dispute, especially involving the courts/legal decisions.

[Thepeopl]

What? Well I guess if both parties are paranoid insecure people who equally distrust each other I guess it'd make for good reality TV?

I mean, it's a little bit like the current paradigm where we mandate by law that insurance must cover basically every kind of birth control for women, but no birth control of any sort for men. This was argued in favor of due to women's unique biology, where a pregnancy harms her more than a man.

This is viewed by said proponents as equality - correcting for a biological inequality.

If that's the version of equality you subscribe to, then yes - free paternity tests would be a form of correcting a biological inequality, as a woman can be certain of her parentage, but a man cannot.

As far as I know, pessarium or womens condoms are not payed for by health insurance.

But I would applaud condoms in the health insurance. They are actually preventing some illnesses and pregnancies.
Most birth control methods that are being payed for by health insurance don't. But they do change hormonal levels in her body, can damage her ability to reproduce and can increase the risk of cancer, thrombosis and cardiac arrest.

And from personal experience, decrease the libido.

So we choose to use condoms.

Before we got pregnant, we talked about it. We actually got married because of the parental rights of the father.
We knew that we wanted kids and from each other. If we would feel the need to have children with another person, we will talk about it first. Same as when we feel the need to go out with some one else.

I think that open communication and trust are better than free paternity tests

[Katganistan]

There should certainly be a paternity test before a man is legally listed as the father of the child if he does not think he is the father, and paternity should always be proven before anyone is compelled to pay child support, but I see no reason why everyone should be tested if there is no paternity dispute.

This.