Bill: Mandatory Paternity Tests Before Birth Certificates Issued

Status
Not open for further replies.
GarnetTigerMom said:
What if the mother lied to protect her child and herself? whatever the reasons the mothers have,, it her business. What if the father have a criminal history? What if he done something to her? maybe she have a good reasons to lie. Some women I have met says they did it for protection of their children. But, hey I respect their deiscions and their business.
Click to expand...


There are laws to help protect children, have them call the police if a child/mother are in danger and get a lawyer.

Otherwise they will get caught in one of their lies.
 
Angel said:
There are laws to help protect children, have them call the police if a child/mother are in danger and get a lawyer.

Otherwise they will get caught in one of their lies.
Click to expand...

Tell me how often does this happen? hardly. Only unless the mother willing to confess. Can't get arrest just because she leave the birth cerificate blank.
 
GarnetTigerMom said:
If her boyfriend or a friend ask to have his name on birth cerificate yes. There is no law on that.
Click to expand...
First of all you said you don't agree with lying on a birth certificate, now you saying it's okay. Make up your mind.

It is wrong to lie on a birth certificate. And a boyfriend cannot adopted the child unless the father gives up his parental rights, then the father's rights will be terminated, will no longer is responsible for current child support.
 
Cheri said:
Are you saying it's okay to lie on the birth certificate? Is it ok to pick any "father" that the mother thinks that might be the father of her child to be written on a birth certificate?
Click to expand...

You are forgetting that the father must sign the birth certificate. If he does not think he is the father, he has the option of not signing. A woman can't jsut put any name she wants to on the birth certificate.

No one has answered my question about an infertile couple that goes to a sperm bank. What about that situation? Are you saying that because the DNA will show that the sperm donor is the birth father, that his name should be on the birth certificate? What about confidentiality? Those who contribute to sperm banks do so anonymously, and don't want their names revealed. Likewise, the couple is married, and the husband's name goes on the birth certificate, but he didn't contribute anything to the child's conception. What about these cases? Particularly since the husband is willing to accept the child as his own, and raise and support it. Should he be denied that right just because he didn't contribute DNA?
 
jillio said:
You are forgetting that the father must sign the birth certificate. If he does not think he is the father, he has the option of not signing. A woman can't jsut put any name she wants to on the birth certificate.

No one has answered my question about an infertile couple that goes to a sperm bank. What about that situation. Are you saying that because the DNA will show that the sperm donor is the birth father, that his name should be on the birth certificate. What amount confidentiality. Those who contribute to sperm banks do so anonymously, and don't want their names revealed. Likewise, the couple is married, and the husband's name goes on the birth certificate, but he didn't contribute anything to the child's conception. What about these cases? Particularly since the husband is willing to accept the child as his own, and raise and support it. Should he be denied that right just because he didn't contribute DNA?
Click to expand...

what about adopted children or same-sex couples?
 
shel90 said:
what about adopted children or same-sex couples?
Click to expand...

It would be the same situation, except that a child that is adopted is issued a new birth certificate with the adoptive parent's names on it. But in the case of artificial insemination using a sperm donor, the husband is automatically listed as the birth parent, and doesn't have to adopt the child. It was born within the marriage, and therefore, the law considers the child to be his. As it stands, now, anyway. The passage of this bill could throw all sorts of complications into that.

I agree that it is morally wrong to name a father that you know for certain is not the father of the child as a deceptive act. But we can't legislate morality.
 
Cheri said:
First of all you said you don't agree with lying on a birth certificate, now you saying it's okay. Make up your mind.

It is wrong to lie on a birth certificate. And a boyfriend cannot adopted the child unless the father gives up his parental rights, then the father's rights will be terminated, will no longer is responsible for current child support.
Click to expand...

First of all I said she lie for a good reasons that we do not know about. So get it? If she lie for a reasons to "PROTECT" her child or herself then we can't possibly know why. it her business. She don't have to ask child support if she want it. Where the law says she required for it?
 
jillio said:
You are forgetting that the father must sign the birth certificate. If he does not think he is the father, he has the option of not signing. A woman can't jsut put any name she wants to on the birth certificate.

No one has answered my question about an infertile couple that goes to a sperm bank. What about that situation? Are you saying that because the DNA will show that the sperm donor is the birth father, that his name should be on the birth certificate? What about confidentiality? Those who contribute to sperm banks do so anonymously, and don't want their names revealed. Likewise, the couple is married, and the husband's name goes on the birth certificate, but he didn't contribute anything to the child's conception. What about these cases? Particularly since the husband is willing to accept the child as his own, and raise and support it. Should he be denied that right just because he didn't contribute DNA?
Click to expand...

Yep, I agree with you, I have know few friends have gone to sperm bank.. they do not know who the father is because it he is just a "donor" to the sperm bank and his name is hiden for confidentiality. If the child want to know his birth father,, then have to wait til he or she is 18 to know who the sperm donor father name is.
 
GarnetTigerMom said:
First of all I said she lie for a good reasons that we do not know about.
Click to expand...

:-o lying is never a right thing to do. dishonesty would only ruin the relationship between the child and the mother. Were we all taught at an early age that lying is wrong?
 
jillio said:
And you already have the right to request that. Simply because you believe your wife to be cheating does not automatically transfer to "All women cheat and therefore must have a DNA test done at the birth of every child they bear." Maybe you should make better choices in partners rather than expecting all of us to be responsible for your errors in judgement.
Click to expand...

And maybe women shouldn't be hopping into bed with every Tom, Dick and Harry.
 
GarnetTigerMom said:
What if the mother lied to protect her child and herself? whatever the reasons the mothers have,, it her business. What if the father have a criminal history? What if he done something to her? maybe she have a good reasons to lie. Some women I have met says they did it for protection of their children. But, hey I respect their deiscions and their business.
Click to expand...

And deny the father's right to be part of their child's life?

Women who claim "protection for the children" aren't doing it for the child's "protection". They are using the child as an emotional pawn to get what they want.

Women are just as manipulative as men.
 
jillio said:
You are forgetting that the father must sign the birth certificate. If he does not think he is the father, he has the option of not signing. A woman can't jsut put any name she wants to on the birth certificate.

No one has answered my question about an infertile couple that goes to a sperm bank. What about that situation? Are you saying that because the DNA will show that the sperm donor is the birth father, that his name should be on the birth certificate? What about confidentiality? Those who contribute to sperm banks do so anonymously, and don't want their names revealed. Likewise, the couple is married, and the husband's name goes on the birth certificate, but he didn't contribute anything to the child's conception. What about these cases? Particularly since the husband is willing to accept the child as his own, and raise and support it. Should he be denied that right just because he didn't contribute DNA?
Click to expand...

Not necessairly depending on the jurisdiction of the said state.
 
My nephew's biologocal father never wanted to do anything with my nephew so his father ran off into unknown land and was never heard of.. My brother stepped in and adopted my nephew and loved him like he was his own son. We all grew to love him and it doesnt matter if he is not the real "------" but he is one of the family members. My other brother also stepped in and adopted my nephew due to his biological father being in trouble and in prison sexually molesting kids. My nephew knew who his real father was but didnt want nothing to do with him. he rather have my brother as his real dad, period. dna tests wont change that.

I think it will run in to problems like others pointed out about sperm banks, adopted children, and others. That will not work. it sound like we gotta be in a big trouble as they want all of our blood on records .. whatever happen to medical confidinately? i think we are going into dangerous terrority. i agree something is not right.

Anyway I sued my sons father for child support cuz he was not giving me enough money. They made me have dna test on me and my son. I never lied about who the father was. Dna test said the father is 100% TJ's father! I was happy to take it to show them that i didnt lie about it. But for those who are married and have babies.. What if they never cheated? yet they are forced to have dna tests? What then? It wont do any good.

I only think it should be applied to those who are not married/divorced people that have children out of marriage. If only situation arises then i dont see why we shoudlnt have dna tests.. if only you think but not mandatory like bill is all about.
 
jillio said:
It would be the same situation, except that a child that is adopted is issued a new birth certificate with the adoptive parent's names on it. But in the case of artificial insemination using a sperm donor, the husband is automatically listed as the birth parent, and doesn't have to adopt the child. It was born within the marriage, and therefore, the law considers the child to be his. As it stands, now, anyway. The passage of this bill could throw all sorts of complications into that.

I agree that it is morally wrong to name a father that you know for certain is not the father of the child as a deceptive act. But we can't legislate morality.
Click to expand...

Maybe we should?
 
jillio said:
Exactly. There are already measures in place to handle these situations. We don't need to make mandatory paternity testing a law when paternity is not being contested. And, BTW, there are just as many men who deny their paternity to get out of taking responsibility as there are women who lie about paternity. In fact, it is usually the case when a case goes to court that the woman is stating who the father of the child is, and the father is denying it. And remember, the father's DNA sample has to be available to prove paternity.
Click to expand...

I was thinking - Since it is normally settled in the court requesting a paternity test to clear out the commotion of who the father of the baby is. Why would that proposed bill be in the air when it is already settled in the court? What's the point of having that bill and what good will it do?

If it is just only to collect the DNAs in the database, I just don't see how it is irreverent because DNAs can be obtained in many various ways by donating blood, dental works, urine test, so and on.

Sure, I can understand it is good for a child to know who the father is but I think it also contains that the DNA testings already exists and it normally is ordered in court to clear it out and lay it on the table.
 
Byrdie714 said:
And maybe women shouldn't be hopping into bed with every Tom, Dick and Harry.
Click to expand...

That is quite a generalized statement. The Toms, Dicks and Harrys that are juimping into bed with these women without committment are just as guilty of wrongdoing as the women are. And these women are but a small number in the whole population. You are operating on the same mistaken and biased assumpttion that this bill does.
 
Jolie_77 said:
I was thinking - Since it is normally settled in the court requesting a paternity test to clear out the commotion of who the father of the baby is. Why would that proposed bill be in the air when it is already settled in the court? What's the point of having that bill and what good will it do?

If it is just only to collect the DNAs in the database, I just don't see how it is irreverent because DNAs can be obtained in many various ways by donating blood, dental works, urine test, so and on.

Sure, I can understand it is good for a child to know who the father is but I think it also contains that the DNA testings already exists and it normally is ordered in court to clear it out and lay it on the table.
Click to expand...

That is the whole point. If a couple's relationship is such that the man suspects that he is not the father of the child, then he already has legal means to determine that. He simply refuses to sign the birth certificate, and requests paternity testing. There is no need to require paternity testing as a matter of course for all births.

And the collecting of DNA without cause is also up in the air as far as the courts are concerned. It is considered to be a violation of privacy rights unless that DNA is collected with probable cause.
 
Byrdie714 said:
Maybe we should?
Click to expand...

That's a frightening statment coming from a "lawyer". If we are going to legislate morality, do you understand the implications it would hold for homosexual relationships?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top