DNA testing

[mrveggieman]

I was discussing this on another website and just wanted to get P&R's spin on it. What do you think about manditory dna testing for all new babies. The benefit of that is there would be no more questions about paternity years down the line. Also since it is legally mandated that would be one less thing for a married couple to argue about and could possibly lead to fewer divorces. Also if it is found out that a woman lied about who the father of her child is what type of punishment should she recieve?

[habsheaven]

It's too intrusive. Let issues of paternity be determined later when they are questioned and the law requires it. As for criminals, it should be part of the regular processing once someone is convicted.

[mrveggieman]

I don't see how it is intrusive. When babies are born they run a bunch of other tests on them. Why not a dna test to prove without a shadow of a doubt who his/her father is? It would eliminate a lot of problems that could arise in the future.

[Wickabee]

It could also cause a lot of problems in the future that never would have arisen. I don't like the idea of a government having a database of everyone's DNA.

[shrewsbury]

I do not have an issue with DNA testing, but I do have an issue with this;

if it is found out that a woman lied about who the father of her child is what type of punishment should she recieve

if a woman had multiple sex partners she would have no way to know and if we were to punish a woman for cheating how would we punish the man?

[habsheaven]

I don't see how it is intrusive. When babies are born they run a bunch of other tests on them. Why not a dna test to prove without a shadow of a doubt who his/her father is? It would eliminate a lot of problems that could arise in the future.

It is none of the government's business who the father is. That's between the mother, father and infant. For example, maybe non-father is content with his relationship with the mother and doesn't want confirmation that she has been sleeping around.

[mrveggieman]

It is none of the government's business who the father is. That's between the mother, father and infant. For example, maybe non-father is content with his relationship with the mother and doesn't want confirmation that she has been sleeping around.

That may be so but what about a guy who has no idea that his wife/girlfriend stepped out on him and he finds out years after the fact that he was raising a child who is not his? I would much rather know up front than to waste thousands of dollars and hours and a child who was not mine.

[Wickabee]

That may be so but what about a guy who has no idea that his wife/girlfriend stepped out on him and he finds out years after the fact that he was raising a child who is not his? I would much rather know up front than to waste thousands of dollars and hours and a child who was not mine.

If he's been raising the child for years it's his, regardless of DNA. I'm totally with Habs on this. I also don't like the government having everyone's DNA on file.

[habsheaven]

That may be so but what about a guy who has no idea that his wife/girlfriend stepped out on him and he finds out years after the fact that he was raising a child who is not his? I would much rather know up front than to waste thousands of dollars and hours and a child who was not mine.

By the time he finds out he SHOULD consider the child his regardless of who's DNA comes up.

[mrveggieman]

By the time he finds out he SHOULD consider the child his regardless of who's DNA comes up.

I see what you are saying but using that logic there is no incentive for a woman to put a baby on a guy just for his money or whatever agenda she has. You are both right I usually don't like the gov't all up in my business but this is a time where I would rather have them involved in the front end in order to avoid a nightmare may years later.