Bill: Mandatory Paternity Tests Before Birth Certificates Issued

Status
Not open for further replies.
Cheri said:
I am sorry I have a hard time believing this story, I know for matter of fact Federal laws require states to not force a parent to pay child support unless the father proven to be the biological father, an establishment of paternity needs to be completed. If it was stated that he is not the father, then he does not require to pay child support it's the law. I have trouble believing a court will allow that to happen. Now if it's really true, then your nephew needs to do something else to clear himself from paying child support. I hope your nephew is not denying that fact the paternity test shown that he is the father, because child support enforcement had informed me that it's very common for a father who would deny the paternity test, just like my son's father did. He wanted another test, and the court granted him 90 days to find a place he can choose to get a paternity test done the father would have to pay, the result came out the same, the father still denied it. He asked for another one, the court denied his requested.
Click to expand...


you dont have to believe me.. but i do know this happened and my nephew will have to get a lawyer to get this cleared up hence why its not resolved yet.. He do have a job but he have to pay child support to 3 kids and bills etc. so its hard to save up money when the job pay sucks. what can he do about it? I do feel sorry for him cuz its not even his child and i dont undy why court still wanted him to pay for child support even it is not his child as dna testing proved he CANT be the father. thats why i think court is dirty.
 
Freaky Cat said:
EVERY marriage? dont say ALL couples who are in marriage cheated. NOT EVERY marriage. some do.. but not ALL. ok.
Click to expand...
I did not say "all". In every marriage doesn't mean everyone is faithful, there are some who had committed adultery. This is what I mean. please ask me to clarify before making assumptions. :ty:
 
Cheri said:
I did not say "all". In every marriage doesn't mean everyone is faithful, there are some who had committed adultery. This is what I mean. please ask me to clarify before making assumptions. :ty:
Click to expand...

yeah but you said EVERY. thats why i said not every marriage resulted in affairs.. :D
 
Freaky Cat said:
yeah but you said EVERY. thats why i said not every marriage resulted in affairs.. :D
Click to expand...
Re-read my post again please I said "You think every marriage never committed adultly?" It's the saying as if you think every marriage if based on faithful, that's not true, there's some that had committed adultery this is what I mean.
 
jillio said:
... 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...
It's against the law to knowingly make false statements ("lie") on official documents, i.e., birth certificates. So, it's morally and legally wrong to falsify a birth certificate.

As time goes by, that certificate is going to be even more valuable in society, due to secure identification requirements. People need valid birth certificates to get Social Security numbers, drivers' licenses, and passports. Moms need valid birth certificates to get child support from the fathers.
 
Doug5 said:
THey should do it for single mothers that want government handouts. Make the father pay for their children instead of taxpayers.
Click to expand...
There's a movement in that direction.

Some states want to refuse welfare payments to mothers who refuse to identify the birth fathers of their children. The states want to force the fathers to pay support so that the mom and children won't need welfare money.

GOV: MOMS MUST ID DADS OR LOSE WELFARE

Reforming welfare reform: Clinton signed the bill; now
 
Cheri said:
Re-read my post again please I said "You think every marriage never committed adultly?" It's the saying as if you think every marriage if based on faithful, that's not true, there's some that had committed adultery this is what I mean.
Click to expand...

yeah i reread your post and you still said EVERY marriage commited adultery. But not every marriage do commit adultery. i think the right word should be SOME. some marriages do commit adultery.

look at the definition for Every.

Definitions of 'every' (ĕvrē) - 3 definitions - The American Heritage® Dictionary

every (adj.) Constituting each and all members of a group without exception.
every (adj.) Being each of a specified succession of objects or intervals: every third seat; every two hours.
every (adj.) Being the highest degree or expression of: showed us every attention; had every hope of succeeding.
 
Freaky Cat, All Cheri did was asked a question, she's not saying every marriage commited adultery.
 
Freaky Cat said:
yeah i reread your post and you still said EVERY marriage commited adultery. But not every marriage do commit adultery. i think the right word should be SOME. some marriages do commit adultery.

look at the definition for Every.

Definitions of 'every' (ĕvrē) - 3 definitions - The American Heritage® Dictionary

every (adj.) Constituting each and all members of a group without exception.
every (adj.) Being each of a specified succession of objects or intervals: every third seat; every two hours.
every (adj.) Being the highest degree or expression of: showed us every attention; had every hope of succeeding.
Click to expand...
Cheri's sentence was clear to me.

You emphasize the word "every" while ignoring this other word in her post--"never".
"You think every marriage never committed adultly?"

Cheri's asking if you think that 100 percent of marriages is 100 percent faithful. She is NOT saying that 100 percent of marriages are adulterous.
 
Liebling:-))) said:
What's wrong with DNA test to prove their paternity ? Is it not hard to demand their right?
Click to expand...

And there are just as many men who are not paying child support for children that are theirs. They fully acknowledge that these children are theirs, but refuse to pay child support. Unless the mother chooses to pursue the issue in a court of law, they are never held responsible. There are many reasons a mother might choose not to pursue the issue. Perhaps the father is not of the character that she wants him involved in the child's life. Perhaps he is a lazy bum whosimply refuses to hold a job for any length of time, and therefore cannot be held respsonsible for child support in a court of law unless he is working. What about the men that father 6,7,8 children with just as many different women and pay child support to none of them? You seem to want to hold the women and their dishonesty responsible for this whole problem, when in fact, the men in these situations bear just as much responsibility.

Likewise, in the case of a couple who is not married or who divorces and shared custody (not joint, but shared) is awarded, neither parent is responsible for child support. What about the fathers that have custody of their children, and the mothers are not paying child support?

I see all kinds of support in these posts that accuse women of being resposnible for this situation, and this bill automatically assumes that women are totally resposnible for this situation, when in fact, men are jsut as responsible as women when it comes to failure to support their children and for lies told in the pursuit of avoiding that.
 
Reba said:
It's against the law to knowingly make false statements ("lie") on official documents, i.e., birth certificates. So, it's morally and legally wrong to falsify a birth certificate.

As time goes by, that certificate is going to be even more valuable in society, due to secure identification requirements. People need valid birth certificates to get Social Security numbers, drivers' licenses, and passports. Moms need valid birth certificates to get child support from the fathers.
Click to expand...

And if a man has willingly signed a birth certificate, and takes responsibility for the child named therein as his own, and supports that child without question, then the government has no business sticking their nose into that situation. A valid birth certificate is already on file. This bill does not separate those single mothers from the married couples. It would force DNA testing in ALL births.
 
Reba said:
There's a movement in that direction.

Some states want to refuse welfare payments to mothers who refuse to identify the birth fathers of their children. The states want to force the fathers to pay support so that the mom and children won't need welfare money.

GOV: MOMS MUST ID DADS OR LOSE WELFARE

Reforming welfare reform: Clinton signed the bill; now
Click to expand...

And there is a difference between these single mothers, and a married couple. Likewise there is a difference between a single woman and her partner who willingly signs a birth certificate and therein, willingly takes responsibility for the child produced during that relationship. If there are suspicions regarding paternity, or if there is not a father named, there are already procedures in place to address that situation. A bill forcing all couples to undergo DNA testing is a violation of civil rights.
 
jillio said:
I see all kinds of support in these posts that accuse women of being resposnible for this situation, and this bill automatically assumes that women are totally resposnible for this situation, when in fact, men are jsut as responsible as women when it comes to failure to support their children and for lies told in the pursuit of avoiding that.
Click to expand...

That's why I'm neutral on this subject because I see fault in both women and men. (and no I'm not saying ALL, but some)
 
Been following this thread with interest and mixed feelings. Of course this debate will bring out lots of emotions, because we're dealing with the basic structure of family--many diverse families.

I tried to read carefully, so if I'm repeating this point, I apologize. The "big brother" aspect of mandatory DNA testing are definitely scary, but that issue aside for a point: a DNA trail will certainly help those people who are clueless about family health issues. For instance, am I in a group which should check early and often about breast or prostate cancer? What other things should I be careful about? Some family trees and memories aren't wrong due to lies; it's just that some are mistaken or misunderstand. And sometimes the facts are lost, but many facts can be recovered from DNA.

Speaking of being misunderstood, that's happening here in this discussion (no surprise, huh?) Even the best at crafting sentences often make their meanings blurry. For that reason and others, it's natural for different members to take the same words to mean different things.

Some are going to jump all over me for this, but we deafies are even more prone to taking things differently. Just one example is those of us who converse in ASL mostly leave off prefixes, suffixes, articles, etc. Order is different and some words are implied. It's really hard to put ASL into print.

I know as much as I try to keep ASL and English separate, I look back at what I write here, and there's the kid signing to his deaf sister. I don't know of an easy fix, either, except to say we're all discussing something important here, so we don't need this thread closed because we're like the ancient workers on Tower of Babel.

And yes, there are three fingers pointing back at me, so I have to try harder as well.
 
Angel said:
That's why I'm neutral on this subject because I see fault in both women and men. (and no I'm not saying ALL, but some)
Click to expand...

Exactly, Angel. It is some, and those some are in the minority. So why should the majority have to accept responsibility when there are already procedures in place to deal with it?
 
jillio said:
Exactly, Angel. It is some, and those some are in the minority. So why should the majority have to accept responsibility when there are already procedures in place to deal with it?
Click to expand...


Did you read the story I posted?

In all honestly Jillioie that's why I'm having mixed feelings about this bill here so that's why I'm being stuck in the middle. ha ha.
 
Angel said:
Did you read the story I posted?

In all honestly Jillioie that's why I'm having mixed feelings about this bill here so that's why I'm being stuck in the middle. ha ha.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've read all of the posts in this thread. I understand your mixed feelings.
 
sequoias said:
I believe warrant can force the guy to do this so they can prove that he's the father of the kid. Warrant can do anything even just for taking off the shirt for injury evidence. So a woman would have to hold a birth cerficate with a blank on it? That sounds weird.
Click to expand...

First of all, A warrant cannot be automatically given. It would have to have a probable cause in order to retrieve the warrant. If the judge sees it to be deemed, then she/he will grant the warrant, only if it is based on circumstantial evidence in order to get a warrant. Circumstantial evidence is usually a theory, supported by a significant quantity of corroborating evidences.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top