Compulsory DNA checks at birth ?

[WindFish]

Sure. Of course. Naturally.

Don't cry. There, there.

Sorry, I thought you should have got a 15 yard penalty for unnecessary pedantry

But I'm really keen on the "All children are all adults' responsibility."

Isn't it true?

Don't teachers, f'r'nstance, have a role in loco parentis?

If you find a small child lost in the forest, don't you have a responsibility towards it?

Don't tax payers have a responsibility for minors?

Yes I guess they do

 

[Core Imposter]

I wouldn't pay a dime if I found out such a thing.

Why would the guy be with the women after finding out that she was unfaithful. I haven't a clue.

 

[Hehehe]

Who should pay to raise adopted kids? By raising these children as his own, he's adopted them as his own.

If you found out tonight that your mom had cheated on your dad, and you were not biologically his son, would he still be your dad?

In a strictly biological sense, no. I would of course always appreciate him for being there for me.

Yes it would be devastating. but child support is about the kids, not the wife. Whatever evil it is to make a guy pay for kids that aren't his, it's worse of an evil to deprive those kids of a parent and the financial support of said parent.

Nobody is depriving the kids of anything. I am merely suggesting that the biological father would pay the bills. The surrogate dad would be free to participate, of course, should he want to do so.

My point is, if the man really has adopted the kids, he doesn't need to be compelled by a legal obligation to take care of them. If he hasn't adopted them, and the kids aren't his, then I don't see why he should pay. I've read more than one opinion piece where a man finds out that the kids aren't actually his, which then leads to a messy divorce. While the man still cares for the kids, he would rather give the money directly to the kids than the wife.

Last, but not least: paternity fraud statistics: it could happen to you. A long article but a good read if you're interested about that sort of thing.

 

[Mise]

I really think that the act of fatherhood is more important than who provided the sperm.

 

[Hehehe]

I really think that the act of fatherhood is more important than who provided the sperm.

If a man is being a father to his (or someone else's) kids, he will provide for them, whether or not there is a legal obligation to do so. But if he doesn't feel responsible for the kids, and the kids are not his, then, in my opinion, he should not have a legal obligation to pay for the kids.

 

[TomYo689]

Who the child support comes from doesn't matter to the kids thus post-conception fatherhood is irrelevent for this situation

 

[Formaldehyde]

Don't tax payers have a responsibility for minors?

A large number of them who live in the US certainly don't think so.

 

[Oruc]

He shouldn't have to pay for kids that aren't his, that's utterly ridiculous.

 

[WindFish]

I totally support compulsory DNA checks at birth

How else will we stop the Maxist-Lenin-Socialist-Commies?

 

[TomYo689]

1/10

 

[Borachio]

I support DNA checks for hamburgers.

They're people too, after all.

Well, they will be, eventually.

 

[Akka]

Who should pay to raise adopted kids? By raising these children as his own, he's adopted them as his own.

If you found out tonight that your mom had cheated on your dad, and you were not biologically his son, would he still be your dad?

Adopting a kid means you willingly becomes the father of a child you know not to be your biological kid.
Samely if you marry a woman who has a 1-year toddler.

It's quite different than being tricked into raising a child you THOUGHT was yours, but isn't.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Families are fine. It's reactionary (and not even all that old!) "nuclear family" models that are breaking down.

I often struggle with one of my sisters over this very issue.

I think she firmly believes that history is like

[beginning of human civilization -> 1989] Christian suburban nuclear family era.

[1990->Present] Sodom like societal apocalypse that demands immediate legislation.

I've often wondered if I should expose her to classical art, but that just seems cruel given how naive she can be

Painting from a wall in Pompeii

Spoiler :

It's hard to believe they had Xboxes and cellphones in Pompeii. That's the only explanation according to people like my sister

 

[metatron]

Who should pay to raise adopted kids? By raising these children as his own, he's adopted them as his own.

Erm, then why is a man who is a biologiocal father but has no interest in raising a child from the get go confronted with all sorts of obligations?

Apparently there are multiple ways of "becoming a father". And apparently the dominant criterion on whether one of these factors makes one a father or not is: What the mother wants.

Yes it would be devastating. but child support is about the kids, not the wife. Whatever evil it is to make a guy pay for kids that aren't his, it's worse of an evil to deprive those kids of a parent and the financial support of said parent.

You could find a substitute: The actual father.
That is if you insisted on the stuff above. Which both (the idea that a child has to have "a mother and a father" and children being all that reliant on their parents' ressources) strike me as a bit 19th century, and we should do away with both, but anyway...

On topic, I agree with those who have said that once you've been a dad to your children, even though they are not biologically yours, you are responsible for them. If you only want to take care for your biological children, make a DNA test right after birth.

I suggest that you (and Mise and Contre) look a bit into how "making a test at birth" works out (here, in Canada and in the UK) in cases where you happen to be married to the child's mother and she has no interest in such a test being made.

 

[Hehehe]

On the subject of making paternity tests, in some countries, such as France and Germany, paternity tests are actually illegal. Unless, of course, one gets a court order. Need I tell you what getting a court order will do to a relationship?

 

[emzie]

Child support is not about what is fair for the father, it's about what's best for the children. What's best for the children is that they have the financial support of both parents. Legally, the guy is the father, even if not biologically. I wouldn't object to going after the biological father for child support if he can be found and if he wants to be a father. For many of these cases though, the biological father cannot be found and so if you try and absolve the legal father financially, there's no second party to help support the kids. In this case, what's best for the children triumphs.

Further, my sympathy is severely limited to any guy who thinks his 12 years of a relationship with his daughter can be forgotten because she's some other guy's kid. If you do that, you're an ass.

 

[TomYo689]

Free money for all whom bear childs

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Child support is not about what is fair for the father, it's about what's best for the children. What's best for the children is that they have the financial support of both parents. Legally, the guy is the father, even if not biologically. I wouldn't object to going after the biological father for child support if he can be found and if he wants to be a father. For many of these cases though, the biological father cannot be found and so if you try and absolve the legal father financially, there's no second party to help support the kids. In this case, what's best for the children triumphs.

Further, my sympathy is severely limited to any guy who thinks his 12 years of a relationship with his daughter can be forgotten because she's some other guy's kid. If you do that, you're an ass.

Now that's really discriminatory, IMO. A guy who doesn't want to raise a child that isn't his has to pay to support the child, yet you think the biological father should have a choice in whether or not they pay to support the child. But when there is no ****olded father in the picture, the biological father has to pay child support by default. How the heck does that make any sense?

One last thing, would you provide a link for your assertion that ****olded fathers have to pay support for a child they later prove isn't theirs? I am not trying to call you out or cast disbelief on you, I've simply never heard this before and I'd like to read up on it. It's oddly interesting.

 

[metatron]

What's best for the children is that they have the financial support of both parents.

What's best for the children is to have the ressources applied to their upbringing that are needed. Period.
The believe that this is primarily the parents financial responsibility is archaic.
But, ok, let's play "Dad Lottery"! Great way to determine your chances in life.

Legally, the guy is the father, even if not biologically. I wouldn't object to going after the biological father for child support if he can be found and if he wants to be a father.

What Hobbs said.

For many of these cases though, the biological father cannot be found

Oh, in most cases the biological father can be found. It's just that the mother has no interest in this. Sometimes for good reasons, sometimes for bad reasons.
And if the biological father really, really cannot be found, isn't that kind of the mother's fault?
Not to be all tough on women who have sex, for, you know, having sex...
...but if you really do guys without doing as much as asking for their names and then fail at birth control, some if not most of the hardship you impose on your future children should be blamed on you, not some guy you duped into believing he's the father.

and so if you try and absolve the legal father financially, there's no second party to help support the kids.

How about the public?
Why don't we try that for a while and get rid of this medieval gender role clusterfrack?

In this case, what's best for the children triumphs.

Not to be lied to about who their father is would be great for the children.

Further, my sympathy is severely limited to any guy who thinks his 12 years of a relationship with his daughter can be forgotten because she's some other guy's kid. If you do that, you're an ass.

Sure that's true.
But the expectation that a) the mother and/or b) the biological father live up to some of the responsibilities they have created (by procreating and by extreme lying) does not make one an ass.

 

[Akka]

Child support is not about what is fair for the father, it's about what's best for the children.

Sorry, that's just trite bollocks. Nobody has responsabilities over children he didn't accept to take charge of - we don't just randomly put orphans in families telling "by the way, this baby is yours and you are responsible of him/her".

If someone didn't get a girl pregnant, there is simply no reason why he should be compelled to care for her children - and it's especially true if he was actually lied to.
But then, if the only important thing is to get money for the kid and we can forcingly recruit anyone available to pay, regardless of if he's the father or not... I guess you'd be okay to have your salary seized to pay for some randomly selected child then.
What, you don't want to pay for a stranger's kid ? How funny...

Further, my sympathy is severely limited to any guy who thinks his 12 years of a relationship with his daughter can be forgotten because she's some other guy's kid. If you do that, you're an ass.

Yeah, right, seeing your whole family life crumble when it's revealed it's built on a lie means you're an ass ?
The ass is the one making judgemental comments from the sideline.

You want to blame someone ? Blame the cheater and the liar, not the victim.