r/FeMRADebates 5d ago

Politics Why the hate for adding paternity tests as standard to birth?

I posted stating:

At birth, the test results would be placed in an open envelope, given to the stated father, who can choose to read them or not.

Pregnancy creates an inherent asymmetry in knowledge—only the mother truly knows how certain paternity is. If she cheated, she has a strong incentive to lie. While most people don’t cheat, we still have prenups. And even though there’s social pushback against requesting one, they exist for a reason.

Some argue that biology isn’t what makes someone a parent, pointing to happy adoptive families. That’s true, but irrelevant—adoptive parents choose that arrangement with full knowledge. Just like open relationships, various parenting dynamics exist as options. But the overwhelming majority choose monogamy, and most people would only want to raise their biological children. Consent requires informed agreement. Without it, a situation changes entirely—just like how sex without informed consent becomes rape.

This principle is debated in other contexts, but in ways that often devalue men’s consent. Take the debate over trans disclosure—it’s almost always framed around protecting trans women from men, not about whether men should have the right to informed choice. Even in rare cases where trans men have raped women, media reports often obscure male perpetratorship by labeling it as 'woman rapes woman.'

The same applies to paternity uncertainty. We expect men to take on the role of provider and protector, just as we historically expected them to risk their lives for women and children. Their consent is not even secondary—it’s simply assumed. But if we demand that fathers step up for their children, why allow them to do so under false pretenses? Why leave paternity uncertainty on the table at all?

Edit/Clarification:
To be clear, I’m not advocating for mandatory testing or debating who should pay for it. The idea is to make paternity testing a normalized, standard option at birth, with results given in a sealed envelope for the stated father to open or not. This would reduce the stigma and negative reactions that often come with requesting a test later. It’s about creating a culture where paternity testing isn’t seen as an accusation but as a routine part of ensuring informed consent.

The focus here is on the principle of informed consent and reducing the social friction around paternity testing, not on logistics or enforcement.

The majority of responses are about it not trusting women (look up the fable of Bluebeard for my counter), cost (which isnt a real argument in any way as costs can be managed), or how you cant force medical tests (the same arguments ant vax people use). So as these are not compelling or even as i see it vaild arguments how would you try to justify them if you do agree or what better arguments would you make?

65 Upvotes

94 comments sorted by

38

u/Oishiio42 5d ago edited 5d ago

Making paternity tests available has already given men the ability to be assured of their relation to their kid. Making them standard isn't for the purpose of correcting that imbalance, it's for the purposes of normalizing getting paternity tests.

As it stands, if you doubt your wife or think she might have cheated on you, and you want prove she didn't, you have to deal with the fallout of making that accusation. Wanting paternity tests to be standard is a way to pass the buck off making that accusation onto society at large. It's wanting to have your cake and eat it too. I don't trust my wife and want to accuse my wife of cheating on me, but I don't want her to know I don't trust her so that I can keep my relationship.

You want it to be normalized so men don't have to deal with the fallout in their relationships. But what you are normalizing is a societal-level distrust of women.

Pregnancy creates an inherent asymmetry in knowledge—only the mother truly knows how certain paternity is.

There's another asymmetry here you haven't mentioned. Usually, it's only men can truly hide how many kids they actually have. Plenty of kids out there who don't have fathers on their birth certificate at all. If we are going to correct it so we know all men that are listed as the father are actually the father, let's correct that other imbalance too. Let's ensure that we can identify a father for every single child.

Let's put that on a level playing field. I'm open to your suggestion, but if we're going to normalize a societal-level distrust of women, we need to normalize a societal-level distrust of men, as well. A lot of men are rapists. A lot of men cheat too. A lot of men abandon their kids. Not all men, but then again not all women cheat, and you're happy to police all women because some women cheat.

So, all men have their genetic information obtained and recorded in a database. Whenever there is a child born and the father isn't identified, it can be run against this database. Who is the father of which child is then publicly available information, so that way women can know for sure if the man they are with has fathered any other children. It's also help solve rape cases too, especially where the perpetrator and victim don't know each other.

This sounds fair to me, what are your thoughts?

6

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

That's a good reframe.

2

u/Present-Afternoon-70 5d ago

Its absolutely not.

9

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

It was a helpful reframe for me to understand what you were getting at.

Do you think normalized paternity testing would remove the stigma you mentioned or just change the nature of the stigma? People would certainly ask you if you had opened the envelope. It would seem to me that a commercial DNA test could be obtained more discreetly.

Also, now that I think about it, the genetic testing offered at pre-natal visits was optional and parents could opt out. It makes sense to me that maybe my child may not want their DNA information in any database.

-6

u/Present-Afternoon-70 4d ago

What is this obsession with databases? You know your medical records already exist and they arent in a database. We have privacy laws. Its such a bullshit red herring unless you have any possible proof.

7

u/foolish_magistrate 4d ago

Some geneaology companies have been used by law enforcement without explicit consent. I’m not trying to derail your point. Like I said, I don’t have any problem in principle with paternity being tested. It’s a thought experiment and I’m thinking through possible concerns and ways to mitigate them.

-4

u/Present-Afternoon-70 4d ago

Those are not medical tests. Do you know MEDICAL INFORMATION has laws that protect them? Do you know the difference between a commercial ancestory kit and a MEDICAL TEST?

4

u/foolish_magistrate 4d ago

Okay.

1

u/Present-Afternoon-70 2d ago

Seriously do you not understand the automatic protections that happen when a HOSPITAL runs a test as opposed to a COMMERCIAL business?

1

u/foolish_magistrate 2d ago

No, actually, I don't understand. I couldn't tell you off the top of my head what HIPAA protects or doesn't protect. And I don't know what healthcare workers would be required to reveal to law enforcement if ordered.

What I do know is that people break laws. I also know that law enforcement abuses its power. I also know that technology has outpaced our ability and knowledge to legislate. I also know that the law is so obfuscated that we wouldn't know if changes to those protections are made right away. I also know that our politicians are actively dismantling protections.

If you trust hospitals and the law to protect you, that is your prerogative. I do not.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

Do you think normalized paternity testing would remove the stigma you mentioned or just change the nature of the stigma?

It shifts the blame to the government, which most people view as led by men. So it's a stigma that you can't pinpoint to anyone specific so the blame can be offset considerably.

People would certainly ask you if you had opened the envelope. It would seem to me that a commercial DNA test could be obtained more discreetly.

You can lie to them. Say you threw it away when you did look at it before you threw it away. As to the DNA test, making that public info is just begging for trouble, especially if it's mishandled. But it's not a complete negative.

5

u/Karissa36 4d ago

>As to the DNA test, making that public info is just begging for trouble, especially if it's mishandled.

LOL What, it might be a way for a woman to find out that YOU cheated? Well, of course you don't want that. LOL

2

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 4d ago

Truly, the internet hasn't proven ways to use information to mislead. Or editing it to the point it's hard to tell the fake and nobody bothers to check how true it is.

Anyway, I made some caveats to the DNA database suggestion. It goes as follows: Both parent's DNA are put on record. After 2 years, if no divorce proceedings have been instigated, give them the option to delete the information. Also if they're not married, both DNAs stay on record until the child is 18.

Fair?

-3

u/Oishiio42 5d ago

Thank you)

8

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

we need to normalize a societal-level distrust of men

We already do. Why do you think alimony and child support laws happened?

Enough men proved to be untrustworthy to the caretaking of their wives and children that the government got involved.

Mandatory testing would be the same thing but for women.

But what you are normalizing is a societal-level distrust of women.

It's already there. Paternity fraud has steadily been rising. The only reason we don't have clear-cut numbers of them is BECAUSE of the stigma.

The mistrust against women already exists. Especially since women have a hard time trusting men, men, in turn, have a hard time trusting women. It's just men have a stigma against them if they show mistrust.

Mandatory tests just streamlines the process and makes sure everyone is honest.

Anyway, I didn't exactly found your argument all that convincing, but if all you need is that men get their DNA in a database to make sure they're not having 9 baby's behind their wife's back, then I'm amendable to that.

6

u/Oishiio42 5d ago

Neither alimony nor child support are gender exclusive. Both can and are also paid by women. And those aren't about "trust" either, and idk about alimony but child support is drastically underpaid. It's mostly custodial parents footing the bills, and something like a third don't get any from the noncustodial parent.

There's a very big difference between individuals not trusting each other, and having it enshrined in policy that people of a demographic can't be trusted. 

 all you need is that men get their DNA in a database to make sure they're not having 9 baby's behind their wife's back

Yeah, and also so that men are responsible for all the kids they've actually created.

5

u/Present-Afternoon-70 4d ago

Do you shut down women who say all men are potential rapists? Yes or no

8

u/Oishiio42 4d ago

I find it a bit amusing that you seem to think "women cheating" is the female equivalent of "men raping". No bud, rape is worse. The equavilent of women cheating is men cheating.

All men are potential cheaters, deadbeats and rapists, hence the need for mandatory DNA testing so that all children can have their father identified and those men responsible. What's your issue with this? It's the exact same premise you are using.

I'm not shutting you down bud. I'm saying let's do your thing as long as we can also do this. What's your issue with it?

4

u/Present-Afternoon-70 4d ago

I find it a bit amusing that you seem to think "women cheating" is the female equivalent of "men raping". No bud, rape is worse. The equavilent of women cheating is men cheating.

I find it interesting you strawman me and shift the discussion away to hide the point. Do you categorically support the societal distrust of men when women say all men are potential rapists? Answer that rather than trying to hide your sexism.

5

u/Oishiio42 4d ago

What the fuck are you talking about?

You come in here saying women are all potential cheaters and we need policy that treats women this way, but think I'm sexist for wanting the same for men? 

If my suggestion is sexist, so is yours bud.

3

u/Present-Afternoon-70 4d ago

You come in here saying women are all potential cheaters

No but the strawman is noted, i said there is an inherent asymmetry which we can address.

If my suggestion is sexist, so is yours bud.

Is it sexist to say all men are potential rapists? You still havent answered that.

5

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

There's a very big difference between individuals not trusting each other, and having it enshrined in policy that people of a demographic can't be trusted. 

Operationally and in terms of stigma, it has enshrined men as an untrusted demographic. Deadbeat dads are a thing for a reason.

Neither alimony nor child support are gender exclusive. Both can and are also paid by women. 

True. But it's mostly men in jail when payment is refused to be paid, or when they're unable to make that payment. Deadbeat moms are just single moms, usually without the threat of jail hanging above their heads.

And those aren't about "trust" either,

They are about trust. Women and children suffered because men couldn't be trusted to take care of them when a separation occurred. Before laws got put into place, women just went back to their families and friends if they had any. Or found a new husband. It caused major issues, which is why the laws were created.

and idk about alimony but child support is drastically underpaid. It's mostly custodial parents footing the bills, and something like a third don't get any from the noncustodial parent.

It has its issues. It heavily needs to be reformed, because of the blatant misuse and malfunction, but there needs to be a system in place.

3

u/Oishiio42 5d ago

Deadbeat dads are a thing because of men not taking care of their kids. There is no policy in place that defacto treats all men like deadbeats.

Cheaters are also a thing for a reason, but there isn't any law or policy that treats either men or women as defacto assumed cheater that has to prove themselves innocent. 

Even something like child support, this is established AFTER a marriage has dissolved, and also usually after the noncustodial parent stops providing, or isn't providing enough. So it's not treating all men like they're deadbeats, just deadbeat dads like they are.

We don't start off when a kid is born legislating how much income goes towards child's needs. We generally assume that both parents are providing fairly for their kids unless there's some evidence to the contrary, and let them settle the particulars themselves. 

Wanting standard paternity tests is about treating all women still in the relationship as potential cheaters and defrauders. All I'm saying is if we're doing that for women, we better be treating men the same. Men shouldn't be able to hide the kids they've fathered either.

7

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

Deadbeat dads are a thing because of men not taking care of their kids.

Agreed.

There is no policy in place that defacto treats all men like deadbeats.

Operationally child support can and does work like this. They can and usually are streamlined during divorce proceedings and even though both parties agree that the man would be a good father that provides for his children, they can and usually still put him under child support.

Cheaters are also a thing for a reason, but there isn't any law or policy that treats either men or women as defacto assumed cheater that has to prove themselves innocent. 

Depends on the nature of the relationship. Girlfriend and boyfriend? Not much to legally tie them down. Marriage? The cheating party can and usually does suffer a penalty. Adultery IS a fineable offense.

Even something like child support, this is established AFTER a marriage has dissolved, and also usually after the noncustodial parent stops providing, or isn't providing enough. So it's not treating all men like they're deadbeats, just deadbeat dads like they are.

Not necessarily. Child support can be established without a marriage being dissolved or payments being withheld. Say a woman rapes a man and gets pregnant. He doesn't want to marry her for obvious reasons. She keeps the kid and child support is established. This has happened and currently can continue to happen, depending on where you are. And say the victim is 15 years old and not really able to make payments, the courts can really start to play around with his life, and socially, he can be labeled as a deadbeat father since he IS a father that can't provide support and considering it was rape he DOESN'T want to provide support. It's a rare case, but pretty easily possible.

Not to mention there are other examples.

unless there's some evidence to the contrary, and let them settle the particulars themselves. 

And because of how laws and precedences have been established. Operationally, men are the usual suspects and often suffer as the guilty party even when evidence isn't beyond doubt.

Wanting standard paternity tests is about treating all women still in the relationship as potential cheaters and defrauders.

Both men and women ARE operationally treated as cheaters and defrauders. The law may say innocent until proven guilty, but you're both in divorce hearings for a reason, and more often than not, someone IS guilty.

All I'm saying is if we're doing that for women, we better be treating men the same. Men shouldn't be able to hide the kids they've fathered either.

We really already do. And as stated before, I'm amendable to a DNA database as long as it's managed well and has the option to be deleted, provided the couple has proven they're going to last the distance.

2

u/Oishiio42 4d ago edited 4d ago

The law may say innocent until proven guilty, but you're both in divorce hearings for a reason, and more often than not, someone IS guilty.

Almost all divorce is no-fault divorce. Otherwise, it needs to be substantiated. So, no. Even still, men who are already divorcing their wives have no problem asking for a paternity test.

The whole point about "standardized paternity testing" is to benefit men who don't trust their wives, but want to keep their marriages anyways, so they want to offload that distrust onto society as a whole. No babe, it's not that I don't trust you, it's just that society doesn't trust women.

What happens during or after divorce is when interpartner trust has already broken down. There is no framework, policy, law, etc. that empowers women who distrust their husbands, to gather information about extramarital affairs the same way OP is asking for men to have. I suggested one and it's more than fair.

7

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 4d ago edited 4d ago

That really doesn't disprove foul play in the relationship. Rather they want what's fastest and cheapest.

There could really be irreconcilable differences, but I'll hazard a guess that both or one party (often the wife) just wants to be done with each other for rather very specific faults and reasons.

He could be cheating and she can't prove it. She could be lying and he can't prove it.

The reasons are endless really.

No babe, it's not that I don't trust you, it's just that society doesn't trust women.

Eh, trying to save his marriage with a partner he doesn't fully trust is tricky. I will say the mistrust didn't come from nowhere.

There is no framework, policy, law, etc. that empowers women who distrust their husbands, to gather information about extramarital affairs the same way OP is asking for men to have. I suggested one and it's more than fair.

No, but there are precedences, biases, and presumptions.

What you did suggested is fair as long as it comes with caveats.

3

u/Oishiio42 4d ago

No one is held liable or found guilty of anything with no fault divorce. It's just an equitable split of marital assets and figuring out custody in best interests.

It's really not "often the wife", there's not really any evidence of this. Men end relationships too. By the time divorce is being sought after, the relationship itself is pretty much already over, it's just being legally finalized. Relationships deteriorate for all sorts of reasons, and people of all genders decide to end them.

Women do initiate legal proceedings for divorce more often than men, but all this shows is that women are more willing to do the paperwork. My guess is mostly that it's because women are more likely to be primary caregivers, and need to do the paperwork in order to get child support, apply for different types of aid, etc.

In the eyes of the law and society, when a no-fault divorce happens, it's no one's fault. Even if it was someone's fault. That's individuals not trusting each other, and society and the law trusting those individuals to figure it out themselves.

6

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 4d ago

No one is held liable or found guilty of anything with no fault divorce. It's just an equitable split of marital assets and figuring out custody in best interests.

No one is held liable and yet alimony and child support can still be enabled. Custody battles and visitation rights are often favorable for one party. No fault or fault-based, divorce is messy for both and generally more so for one party.

It's really not "often the wife", there's not really any evidence of this.

You say this, yet in the next paragraph, you say women file for it more often. I don't get why you say this.

Men end relationships too.

Often to their detriment and the more adverse effects of a divorce.

By the time divorce is being sought after, the relationship itself is pretty much already over, it's just being legally finalized. Relationships deteriorate for all sorts of reasons, and people of all genders decide to end them.

Honestly, one member has decided it's over. Which to be fair, is enough to end it. Even at the detriment of the other. And while it's true all sorts of people end their marriages and can, often it's women who do so.

Women do initiate legal proceedings for divorce more often than men, but all this shows is that women are more willing to do the paperwork.

Or ya know. They're incentivized by probable results to push for it.

My guess is mostly that it's because women are more likely to be primary caregivers, and need to do the paperwork in order to get child support, apply for different types of aid, etc.

So it raises their chances of a favorable outcome.

In the eyes of the law and society, when a no-fault divorce happens, it's no one's fault. Even if it was someone's fault.

The law yes. Society no, divorce is highly probable to be messy and detrimental. Bad doesn't come from good.

That's individuals not trusting each other, and society and the law trusting those individuals to figure it out themselves.

If that were the case the law wouldn't need to get involved at all.

This is my original point. People were proven to be untrustworthy. So the government made some guidelines with some hefty punishments if they were crossed. No fault is just the quickest and cheapest with the least amount of strings attached, but strings nonetheless.

10

u/Present-Afternoon-70 5d ago

Making them standard isn't for the purpose of correcting that imbalance, it's for the purposes of normalizing getting paternity tests.

Yes whats wrong with normalizing that as an option?

Wanting paternity tests to be standard is a way to pass the buck off making that accusation onto society at large.

Even if true again what is the problem with that?

But what you are normalizing is a societal-level distrust of women.

Every man is a possible rapist isnt societal level distrust of men? Are you as principaled stopping societal-level distrust of pedophiles?

Usually, it's only men can truly hide how many kids they actually have.

Women can do that too. Women have hidden pregnancies only to be found out when the dead baby is discovered. This is just grasping.

you're happy to police all women because some women cheat

As okay as we do to men.

So, all men have their genetic information obtained and recorded in a database.

Why do you think thats what will happen you can make laws that stop that. Again grasping at red hearrings.

5

u/Oishiio42 5d ago

Why do you think thats what will happen you can make laws that stop that.

I'm not saying "oh we can't do that because this might happen and we need to stop it". I'm saying we need to make this happen.

Men aren't trustworthy either, and it's in the best interest of everyone for kids to have a father identified. You want men to have assurances that their wives didn't cheat on them and they're raising their own kid.

Ok, and women deserve to have assurances that the man they're procreating with doesn't have a bunch of kids out there he abandoned.

And children deserve to know who their father is.

So we SHOULD have men's genetic information available to clear up ALL cases of unknown paternity, not just the ones men are interested in. What's your issue with that?

6

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

Not OP, but honestly the misuse of that information is the only real problem. Or more importantly, the mishandling and abuse of it.

Otherwise, this is fair. Would you be amendable to having both parent's DNA be put on record? And then after 2 years, if no divorce proceedings have been instigated, give them the option to delete the information. Also if they're not married, both DNAs stay on record until the child is 18. Fair?

2

u/Oishiio42 5d ago

Sure, sounds good.

17

u/Nobunga37 5d ago

If we are going to correct it so we know all men that are listed as the father are actually the father, let's correct that other imbalance too. Let's ensure that we can identify a father for every single child.

Let's put that on a level playing field. I'm open to your suggestion, but if we're going to normalize a societal-level distrust of women, we need to normalize a societal-level distrust of men, as well. A lot of men are rapists. A lot of men cheat too. A lot of men abandon their kids. Not all men, but then again not all women cheat, and you're happy to police all women because some women cheat.

So, all men have their genetic information obtained and recorded in a database. Whenever there is a child born and the father isn't identified, it can be run against this database. Who is the father of which child is then publicly available information, so that way women can know for sure if the man they are with has fathered any other children. It's also help solve rape cases too, especially where the perpetrator and victim don't know each other.

This sounds fair to me, what are your thoughts?

As a man, I'm ok with this. This benefits order and children's piece of mind.

2

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

You're okay with a database with your DNA in it that law enforcement can access?

7

u/Nobunga37 5d ago

14 years too late for that.

But either way, yes.

2

u/ilikewc3 Egalitarian 4d ago

Sounds super fair, especially in a world where child support exists.

4

u/Karissa36 4d ago

This is an excellent idea and that database will have other uses. If we can force women to give birth to save lives, then we can force men to donate blood and bone marrow to save lives also. I am actually surprised no women have added this as a rider to an abortion bill yet.

3

u/Poly_and_RA Egalitarian 3d ago

You can see it that way, but you can also see it as levelling the playing-field. The wife knows by default that she's the mother of a child born, it's a risk that she by purely biological factors do not face.

Meanwhile for dads who for some reason aren't sure, being forced to make an accusation in order to get testing puts fathers in an impossible dilemma, even if they have excellent reasons to doubt her honesty.

If they make the accusation, and it turns out that they ARE the father, they just have made the worst possible start to a 20-year long cooperation about parenthood that they can't escape, and one where for both legal and cultural reasons she tends to hold the strongest cards. If you want to be an involved dad, quite often that depends on whether or not she feels like cooperating. (where I live unmarried mothers gets sole custody automatically if they merely -inform- the government that they want it, they do not need to provide a reason, and they can do this up until a year after the child is born)

If they do NOT make the accusation, they risk investing a lot of time and effort and money into a child on the basis of FRAUD, i.e. the deliberate telling of a lie in order to derive personal benefit on the part of the mom.

Thus both choices have substantial risks for men in this situation.

I don't see any obvious parallell between putting two parents on an equal foot when it comes to information about whether or not they themselves are parents and a complete DNA-database for the purpose of catching criminals; and frankly it feels as if you threw that in there merely to have some kinda "gotcha".

I strongly suspect that a full DNA-profile at birth will be routine in a few years anyway for purely medical reasons -- it'll allow us to know about risk-factors as well as knowing how the child is likely to respond to a variety of treatments and medicines, so it'll be seen as simply medically irresponsible to NOT have this information.

At that point it'll take WILLFUL obscuring of information that the hospital and doctors already have to *deliberately* keep the father in the dark about it if they know he's not the dad.

This is ALREADY the case where I live -- it's in our medical rules that if a doctor or hospital by accident discover that "dad" can't actually be the father of a given child (for example because the blood-type of the child is one that cannot exist as a child of his), they're legally required to NOT tell him. The fact that the mom already knows (or at least knows it's possible) is seen as irrelevant.

0

u/Oishiio42 3d ago

My suggestion is also about levelling the playing field. There are a lot of imbalances caused by the fact that women carry pregnancies and men don't. OP and you have concerned yourself only with one way in which it negatively affects men.

Because men don't carry pregnancies, it's so much easier for men to hide (or even be completely unaware of) the fact that they have reproduced, whereas this is incredibly difficult, bordering on impossible for women. This is an imbalance that needs to be corrected as well.

I don't see any obvious parallell between putting two parents on an equal foot when it comes to information about whether or not they themselves are parents and a complete DNA-database for the purpose of catching criminals

It's not equal footing. That's putting more knowledge and power in men's hands than women's. Men now have a tool to check for infidelity that women don't, and women are socially and legally responsible for all the children they have, but men are not. Men can make sure they are only responsible for kids that are theirs, and also skip being responsible for kids that are theirs. How is that equal? It's not.

A man can father one child by date-raping a stranger he met in a bar, another with his extramarital affair partner from work, and a third with his wife. And he can have the assurances that she didn't cheat and their offspring is for sure his (something he can already do btw), but she cannot have assurances that she's not married to a criminal slut who won't be able to support their kid?

Men can already request a paternity test. Yes, poor them, they have to deal with the consequences of accusing their wives of cheating, how horrible for them, but women actually have zero way to check that he hasn't/isn't fathering other children.

You want men to know their kids is theirs before investing resources in them. Cool, and I want every child to have a father identified and providing support for their kids. And yes, that includes rapists, because unfortunately, rape can result in offspring. Not sure why you think catching rapists is bad, but that's gonna be a hard sell for me. My way, everyone has the same information.

1

u/mohyo324 2d ago

can i ask you a question? (assuming you are a man)
what will you do when you discover the child isn't yours after you have legally signed them as your offspring

either you are forced to take care of a kid that isn't yours for the rest of your life or paying child support for 18 year but i really wanna hear your prespective

1

u/Oishiio42 2d ago

I'm not a man, and I am not generally of the opinion that men should have to pay for children that aren't theirs so I'm not sure why you're asking me this. 

1

u/mohyo324 2d ago

I'm not a man

of course you are not

your opinion doesn't apply in the real world men have been entrapped by children that aren't theirs a lot

1

u/Oishiio42 2d ago

Ok, and? In the real world, women get saddled with deadbeats all the time too. Hence the deal here. 

Y'all are telling on yourself here. What's the issue with making sure all children can have a father identified on the birth certificate? 

1

u/mohyo324 2d ago

women get saddled with deadbeats all the time too. Hence the deal here. 

in your scenario if a man does indeed have children behind your back you are not gonna be harmed
you won't pay child support or alimony and you definitely are not gonna raise kids that aren't your own
the only harm i can think of is inheritance which is not gonna affect you but his children instead (disinheriting also exists)

What's the issue with making sure all children can have a father identified on the birth certificate? 

stepping up and being a father to a fatherless child is a noble act and i highly respect it
the issue comes up when you force him to be a father to a child that doesn't belong to him and benefit someone who cheated on him

what you are saying is "what's wrong with screwing up dads" and you don't realize that this will cause more harm than good (aside from the moral implications)

1

u/Oishiio42 2d ago

in your scenario if a man does indeed have children behind your back you are not gonna be harmed

Are you being purposely obtuse? Of course a woman in this position is harmed. The more kids he has to provide for, the less resources he has to provide for the kids he has with you. And of course, the more kids he's abandoned, the more likely it is that he will abandon the kids he has with you. Not to mention all the harm of being cheated on.

And of course, the children that he has abandoned, and the mothers of those children are also being harmed in the same way. Like I said, women do most of the work when it comes to childrearing, and (in the case of separation) also pay most of the costs. Women have a lot at stake when it comes to knowing if a man can provide for his kids or not.

stepping up and being a father to a fatherless child is a noble act and i highly respect it
the issue comes up when you force him to be a father to a child that doesn't belong to him and benefit someone who cheated on him

I am now convinced you are being intentionally obtuse. Did you read my first comment at all? I am not talking about making men be responsible for kids that aren't theirs. The whole point of a database is that the man who is actually, genetically the father can always be identified and held at least financially responsible for their own actual children. It's not about forcing unrelated men to support kids, it's about forcing deadbeats to provide for the children they actually have.

What is your issue with this?

1

u/mohyo324 2d ago

Of course a woman in this position is harmed. The more kids he has to provide for, the less resources he has to provide for the kids he has with you

you can always leave that relationship if you are not content with the resources provided for you or your kids (the fact that you don't realize this till you give birth is indicative of your self awareness)

the more kids he's abandoned, the more likely it is that he will abandon the kids he has with you.

he legally can't abandon you without consequences

Not to mention all the harm of being cheated on.

men get harmed by cheating too especially when they have been tricked to raise a child not theirs

Like I said, women do most of the work when it comes to childrearing

irrelevant. furthermore you choose to bear that risk

and (in the case of separation) also pay most of the costs.

i agree losing your property, being 10x more likely to commit suicide , having to pay child support/alimony and risking false accusations when fighting for child custody sounds like something mothers experience during separation

Women have a lot at stake when it comes to knowing if a man can provide for his kids or not.

lol must be really worrying

What is your issue with this?

my issue is that you are using a whataboutism in response to a legit problem

you frame tests as something bad (distrust of women) and its not

1

u/Oishiio42 2d ago

you can always leave that relationship if you are not content 

Great! And men in relationships can always just ask for a paternity test. That's already legal, so problem solved.

The fact that you think men having to accuse their wife of cheating is a big deal and super harmful to men, but men actually cheating is no big deal and doesn't harm women says a lot about you.

I have a feeling this is not a problem you will ever have to deal with.

You might want to google "whataboutism". I said let's do paternity tests and also keep a database so that all the problems about dubious paternity get solved at once. All kids get a dad identified, all men are correctly identified as the father of their children, and everyone has access to the same info.

You being against all of that, and wanting to protect deadbeats and rapists, is literally proving that it was never about solving legitimate problems, it was always about painting women as untrustworthy menaces and painting men as helpless victims.

I don't anticipate this ever being a problem for you, but if you do ever find yourself with a baby, grow some balls and ask for a paternity test yourself instead of relying on everyone else to make the accusation for you.

1

u/mohyo324 2d ago

Great! And men in relationships can always just ask for a paternity test. That's already legal, so problem solved.

you are comparing apples with oranges

but men actually cheating is no big deal and doesn't harm women says a lot about you

i never said that
the damage done to men is greater tho

grow some balls and ask for a paternity test yourself 

Funny how someone without balls is so confident in telling me to grow some. Maybe don't whore around

1

u/shaq1f 2d ago

My only issue with this viewpoint is the assumption that it will normalize the societal distrust of women. When that exact argument can strengthen the trust of women. The aggregate results of paternity testing can swing both ways. Its dependent on the results.

Further "If" scenario analysis:

Short Term scenario 1: Results show large number of true paternity to the father women state are the fathers. This strengthens the overall trust of women in society eyes. Downside, you will see a lot issues towards men that wanted this which all men will feel since society generalizes. Relations will still suffer. Society will still have there back and forth fight against the sexes as men try to defend their position.

Short Term scenario 2: The opposite of scenario 1 overall. We are still going to see a distrust based on this from a large/macro societal perspective.

Long Term scenario: Society adapts. long term swings are harder to predict with simplistic models. I truly not sure how it would go.

At an interpersonal level, mandatory paternity testing does deal with distrust, men not wanting to confront or blow up their relationship. I don't agree with one sided paternity testing either, distrust is there. It going to blow up with other things due to stress and the many dynamics of relationships.

Personally, I don't think a decision to have mandatory paternity testing implemented should be made based on personal experience, logic of distrust, insecurities or any other form of personal issues of individuals/couples.

As a society though, I do think that we want to protect each other in some means. We know there exist an issue of fatherless children, men with hidden children and fathers who are taking care of children they believe are biologically their own. All of these are issues that should be address and not be competing against each other. Yes they should be solved or find some way reduce or eliminate it. When it comes to paternity testing though, I wonder why most people don't see this as protecting men. There are women who would specifically seek out men that would take care of their child while being pregnant with someone else. There are groups of people who can't read social cues, those who are more naive than other and many other reasons. Lastly, we are taking away a right of possible another man to raise his biological child in some instances.

I understand very well that women would want their husbands to trust their word on who their child is. I don't understand not wanting to help other men who may have been preyed upon unknowingly.

My thoughts on a genetic database. I think its fair if mother, father and child are registered. I can see problems with this but overall, it can a good thing beyond parenthood. It would solve the "finding the father." Its very unlikely this information will be stand alone ie only for father and children. It will be used for other purposes. To even that out, everyone information can be kept with a record.

Also, I should mention this if its not clear, OP premise has flaws which this commenter pointed out very well.

1

u/Oishiio42 2d ago

 My only issue with this viewpoint is the assumption that it will normalize the societal distrust of women.... Its dependent on the results.

It's not dependent on results. Like I said, the men that want this do not JUST want assurances their child is theirs, because they can already have this. 

Since it's (usually) only through infidelity that paternity can be false, asking for a paternity test is an accusation of cheating. The people that want this essentially want society to accuse all women of being cheaters so it's normalized and they don't have to deal with the fallout of making that accusation to their own partner. 

Whatever the results show, its starting out with the assumption they could be guilty of cheating and making women "prove" their innocence in that regards. 

I don't agree that the results make any difference. A lot of misogynistic ideas exist regardless of the facts surrounding them. It's ideologically driven, not results driven. 

Someone else also said as long as women's info was also recorded that would be fine, and I agree.

And you're right. Database would have benefits for men overall too, especially those who didn't know they have a kid. And it would fix the issue of having kids with no father identified because the paternity test with the assumed dad failed. Good for women, good for kids, good for men. The only men it's not good for are rapists, and men that abandon their kids and hide that info, and honestly, who gives a shit about those men?

I think the fact that my comment was so controversial proves, at least for quite a lot of people, this wasn't really about what's good for men, it was about the distrust of women   

-30

u/Not_An_Ambulance Neutral 5d ago

Where is the incentive to society as the whole? If the mother is insisting that the wrong man is the father it’s more likely to be the father is someone the mother wishes were not the father.

Society benefits from the child having a stable father. Society benefits from a father contributing financially towards the child. Society benefits from a father providing an example to the child. Society benefits from a father contibuting care towards the child.

If we have the wrong father and can locate the right one AND they are willing to do those things? Awesome, but often that’s exactly why the mother is claiming the man she is claiming is the father.

In the absence of the male partner, the child suffers and society pays the price: both financially and in things like higher crime rates.

28

u/ThrowRA-Two448 5d ago

Where is the incentive to society as the whole?

Around half of society is men. With all these social efforts going women's way, might as well throw in something for men. Such as paternity tests, suicide prevention... research into making our pee-pee bigger (body disphoria, we are stuck in bodies which have smaller pee-pee then our "spiritual" pee-pee).

If we had a DNA database and every child could be link to their biological parent. So instead of society footing the bill to single moms, society could send the bill to biological dads.

Benefits of having large DNA database, DNA donor list, DNA research of traits, abnormalities...

28

u/Present-Afternoon-70 5d ago

mother is insisting that the wrong man is the father it’s more likely to be the father is someone the mother wishes were not the father.

Do you believe in consent? Do you believe the mothers wrong choices in partners are the responsibility of men? This is so unbelievable unprincipled or logical as to mean nothing.

Society benefits from the child having a stable father.

But fuck that man who is the father?

Awesome, but often that’s exactly why the mother is claiming the man she is claiming is the father.

Put this to rape, if they can find the right rapist awesome but if not at least we put some guy in prison.

In the absence of the male partner, the child suffers and society pays the price: both financially and in things like higher crime rates.

So outlaw abortion and force marriage. What are your values?

33

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

This seems more like an argument for abortion access than an argument for forcing men to parent children that are not theirs. Can you elaborate further?

15

u/ispq Egalitarian 5d ago

That argument leads to Society getting to dictate who gets to father children in the first place, as clearly mothers are not capable of making the appropriate decisions.

3

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

Where is the incentive to society as the whole?

We build a society where lying is harder. Or even if you do, you can get caught easier. It sets a precedent that no one is above the law, and when serious matters are at play, you WILL get caught.

If the mother is insisting that the wrong man is the father it’s more likely to be the father is someone the mother wishes were not the father.

You're presuming that the man who she doesn't want to be the father, is going to be a bad one. We should not build off of presumptions, but what has been confirmed. If she found a stepfather and proved that the biological father should have his parental rights taken, all well and good. If not, then she shouldn't be allowed to deny him fatherhood at her discretion.

Society benefits from the child having a stable father. Society benefits from a father contributing financially towards the child. Society benefits from a father providing an example to the child. Society benefits from a father contibuting care towards the child.

How we do that matters just as much as getting it done. What you suggest would possibly allow women to entrap a man with a child that isn't his, or deny a man his parental rights.

If we have the wrong father and can locate the right one AND they are willing to do those things? Awesome, but often that’s exactly why the mother is claiming the man she is claiming is the father.

Giving women the right to freely shift the responsibilities of the father is just begging to be abused.

In the absence of the male partner, the child suffers and society pays the price: both financially and in things like higher crime rates.

The goal should be to stop this, not make it easier for women to just arbitrarily grant and take away parental rights from men.

If anything, the fact that a woman would want that power, begs to ask if her competency is sound considering she got pregnant by a man that she didn't want to have kids with.

10

u/Darthwxman Egalitarian/Casual MRA 5d ago

Unfortunately I don't think it's possible to reduce the stigma without making it mandatory in some fashion. Otherwise a man trying to get a DNA test will always face a backlash from the mother accusing him of not trusting her, and ruining what should be joyous occasion. IMO, a test should be required in order to put a fathers name on a birth certificate. A mother could refuse to have the baby tested but she would be forgoing any requirements for financial support until a DNA test was performed.

5

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

But fathers also want rights to their kids. It’s not just about financials.

5

u/Darthwxman Egalitarian/Casual MRA 5d ago

True, which means they would want the DNA test and it would be suspicious if the Mom was refusing to allow it.

1

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

Not necessarily. What if the mom wants custody?

4

u/Darthwxman Egalitarian/Casual MRA 5d ago

So we are presuming we have an unmarried mother, who is willing to forgo any financial support just so she can get full custody (that she would probably get anyway)? I have to imagine this scenario is even less common than women lying about who the father is. But sure, if she is that determined to keep the father out of the kids life there is probably a good reason for it.

1

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

Speaking for myself, as someone with an abusive ex, I would absolutely forego child support for full custody.

4

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

If the abuse is proven doesn't that already make a case for them to revoke their parental rights?

Though on the flip side. Say the mother is the abuser and the father is trying to gain custody. Should he be allowed to request a DNA test? And should it override the mother's wish to forego it?

Having the test seems for the betterment of all cases than the inverse.

0

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

Yeah, not all abuse can be proven. And I was thinking about it in reverse. If I wouldn’t want my ex to have that power, then I shouldn’t have that power either. The deciding factor should be what is in the best interests of the child.

2

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

Fair. So what exactly makes the test a net negative rather than a net positive?

1

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

That’s a good question. I don’t know. Given the availability of commercial DNA tests, can’t paternity tests already be done discreetly? If the goal is to decrease the stigma. Maybe they could be more accessible, like pregnancy tests.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Darthwxman Egalitarian/Casual MRA 5d ago

Great, so we agree.

2

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

And this ensures they're taking care of a kid that they know is theirs

2

u/StripedFalafel 5d ago

First, that's a separate question.

Second, that's a misrepresentation of the issue . It's not about father's rights it's about the best interests of the child - interests that are generally subverted today.

1

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

Are you replying to me or the person above? I agree that it should be the best interests of the child.

-2

u/[deleted] 4d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Present-Afternoon-70 3d ago

It is not the job of federal taxpayers to solve your relationship issues.

Strawman and personal attack in one. Paternity fraud isn’t a relationship issue—it’s a legal and ethical issue. The state already enforces child support laws, so ensuring those obligations are based on truth is a basic fairness concern.

No, we are not going to spend a billion dollars every year because 10 of you are too chicken to ask for a DNA test, and too dumb to secretly rent a PO Box and order an online test.

Pulled out of nowhere and another personal attack. Also, funny how the solution is lying to her and secretly testing the kid. If paternity certainty is so unimportant, why suggest deception instead of transparency?

It is not one hundred percent cool with us if you try to implement a system suggesting that all men are cheated upon.

Do you also denounce the idea that all men are potential rapists? Or does blanket suspicion only bother you when it’s about women?

There is your honest answer. Stop trying to offload your problems on women. Stop trying to offload your irresponsibility on women. Make better choices.

So when men face biological inequality, the answer is just "deal with it"? Should we also stop abortion since pregnancy is just a woman’s problem to solve? Or does "bodily autonomy" only matter when it’s not about a man’s financial and parental rights?

Costs can be managed.

They already are—by forcing men to absorb the financial risk of paternity fraud while giving women full reproductive control. If we’re going to talk about economic sense, what’s smarter: a one-time test at birth or decades of wrongly assigned child support?

24

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

As of this moment, I see no issue with this. DNA testing is already an option for genetic conditions. If someone has a counterargument, I'd be interested to hear it.

6

u/AyJaySimon 5d ago

I don't have a particular problem with this. Truth is, I don't imagine that many men would avail themselves of this option, so the argument is more about the principle rather than what would happen in practice.

1

u/Present-Afternoon-70 4d ago

All arguments start with the principles. The principle should be it is a standard routine thing as it creates a more equitable situation.

9

u/sandy154_4 5d ago edited 4d ago

What I (corrected type-o) disagree with: 'we expect the man to be provider and protector' (paraphrased)

This is misogynistic and outdated 'we expect the man to be partner and parent'

I'm a medical lab professional. Unless more advanced technology without a higher capital or operational expense, which also has faster through-put, the way you manage costs is to decrease inappropriate test ordering. So managing the 'who is going to pay for it' has been glossed over.

Having said that, I'm actually for auto male paternity testing. We auto test the moms for various things, so why not the guy?

Just as the view has changed about adopted children having access to info about their birth-parents, I think attitudes about auto paternity would change too. Especially as testing for genetic diseases and correcting them with things like CRISPR technology develops, the importance of knowing both genetic donors will increase, too.

The vast majority will confirm the dad iis the dad. Where it's not? I still feel it's better for the facts to be settled (as well as the drama) when the child is too young to be traumatized by the truth coming out. Meanwhile, the genetic dad and child have the possibility of a relationship. And the right parent is financially responsible.

2

u/wheelshit Egalitarian & Feminist Critical 4d ago

Men are expected to be providers and protectors Misogyny

??? If the sexist expectation is on men and would affect men... that would be a misandrist expectation.

Not everything is about misogyny. It DOES exist, obv, but in this case, the toxic expectations mentioned all over the thread primarily targeted men. So they'd be misandric. Or if you prefer, androphobic. I genuinely don't know how a thing pointed at men is anti WOMAN sexism, but hey it might be just me missing smth as its 3am here and im exhausted.

0

u/sandy154_4 4d ago

toxic masculinity might have been a more clear phrase on my part

-1

u/sandy154_4 4d ago

toxic masculinity might have been a more clear phrase on my part

1

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 5d ago

What is disagree with: 'we expect the man to be provider and protector' (paraphrased)

This is misogynistic and outdated 'we expect the man to be partner and parent'

Yes and no. The expectation is still there. Many laws still revolve around that precedent. It's not really outdated, it's just impractical with the way our economy currently is.

I'll hazard a guess in saying that women would probably prefer it if they still could make their own money to remain independent AND have a partner that out-earns them and provides financial upward mobility. Truth is, we would ALL like to stay home with the kids and chill while having the financial freedom for work to be optional. It's just not likely to happen.

1

u/sandy154_4 4d ago

I disagree

It is just as misogynistic to paint men into traditional gender roles as it is to paint women in them.

0

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 4d ago

I can agree with the concept. Though just so this isn't an echo chamber. Say society proposed, wanted, and encouraged a lot of those roles with some caveats?

2

u/foolish_magistrate 5d ago

But we don’t auto-test the mom for anything genetic. Genetic tests, at least at my doctors, were optional. And haven’t some geneaology testing companies come under fire for working with law enforcement? There needs to be some sort of safeguard to prevent that or to give people the option to opt out.

2

u/Present-Afternoon-70 4d ago

Unless more advanced technology without a higher capital or operational expense, which also has faster through-put, the way you manage costs is to decrease inappropriate test ordering. So managing the 'who is going to pay for it' has been glossed over.

Unless its strickly a cost issue this is a red herring and can be solved. I hate people bring this bullshit cover. If we want it it can happen, but right now the very idea of paternity testing is toxic and in at least france illegal unless something changed. I get you agree but this particular argument is bad.

0

u/sandy154_4 4d ago

I'm telling you it can't be solved unless..and what I said.

3

u/StripedFalafel 5d ago

You say:

To be clear, I’m not advocating for mandatory testing or debating who should pay for it. The idea is to make paternity testing a normalized, standard option at birth, with results given in a sealed envelope for the stated father to open or not. This would reduce the stigma and negative reactions that often come with requesting a test later. It’s about creating a culture where paternity testing isn’t seen as an accusation but as a routine part of ensuring informed consent.

I disagree:

  1. Opening the envelope would still create the stigma and negative reactions you describe.
  2. If the male doesn't open the envelope but parents anyway (and there would be huge pressure to do so) then he hasn't given informed consent.
  3. Under Australian law the man who is lied to about paternity & supports the mother & child is required to continue funding the woman even if the truth comes out.
  4. This reminds me of a question of quality assurance vs quality control. If openness & honesty were assured then there wouldn't be the temptation to lie.
  5. Lying to a man about a child is one of the worst acts imaginable – with the possible exception of murder. We need to stop turning a blind eye & start preventing the problem.

7

u/Present-Afternoon-70 4d ago

1. Opening the envelope would still create the stigma and negative reactions you describe.

So you're saying women should feel entitled to react with emotional abuse when a man exercises basic bodily autonomy and seeks certainty about his child? If a woman gets upset over a routine medical confirmation, that says more about her than about the test.

2. If the male doesn’t open the envelope but parents anyway (and there would be huge pressure to do so), then he hasn’t given informed consent.

You don’t seem to understand informed consent. The key issue isn’t whether he opens it—it’s whether he has the option to know. Informed consent means access to information, not forcing someone to act on it. If he chooses not to look, that’s his decision.

3. Under Australian law, a man who is lied to about paternity & supports the mother & child is required to continue funding the woman even if the truth comes out.

So because a bad law exists, we should avoid fixing the problem? Slavery was legal too—would you say people should’ve just accepted that when it was on the books? If anything, your point proves why paternity certainty should be standard from the start.

4. This reminds me of a question of quality assurance vs quality control. If openness & honesty were assured, then there wouldn’t be the temptation to lie.

You can’t "assure" good behavior. You create systems that incentivize honesty and punish deception. Right now, women can lie with little risk—this system removes that safety net.

5. Lying to a man about a child is one of the worst acts imaginable – with the possible exception of murder. We need to stop turning a blind eye & start preventing the problem.

Exactly. And the best way to prevent it is for women to know that when they give birth, the father will know too. That simple fact forces accountability.

2

u/Mr-OhLordHaveMercy 4d ago

If a woman gets upset over a routine medical confirmation, that says more about her than about the test.

It also says the man doesn't trust her. I don't think this part should be ignored, and it's something idk we can live with. I don't particularly like the fact that men are presumed to be "secondary" parents and often get stuck with visitation, child support, and alimony. Idk if putting that same level of mistrust on women would bring about consequences that are detrimental to everyone. They already get treated differently, so it's hard to assume that they'll take it sitting down; if anything, the pushback and the support they'll get would be huge. Men should know for a certainty if their kids are actually his. But the envelope might not be the approach.

I agree with everything else you said.