Should states require a DNA test before listing someone as the father on a birth certificate?

[RB TexLa]

Poll question: Should states require a DNA test before listing someone as the father on a birth certificate?

I have thought it should be a requirement for years but this thread brought it to my attention.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8613140&mesg_id=8613140

[SocialistLez]

1. What about same-sex parents? NT

[RB TexLa]

3. Soon any combination of people or a single person will be able to mother/father a child

if the DNA shows a person is both mother and father they will be listed as such.

For same sex parents they will be able to each donate whichever part (mother or father) to create the child. We've mapped DNA, creating an egg from a man or a sperm from a female is not that far off.

Obviously without that technology today a same sex parented birth is handled in part as an adoption whatever biological contributer that is not going to be a parent is legally not included as a parent on the birth certificate or in the child's life.

[usregimechange]

2. Why?

[RB TexLa]

5. The people's word should just be taken when creating a legal document?

You do know people have lied about who has or has not fathered a child, right?

[usregimechange]

11. People commit drug use in their homes as well but mandatory homes searches seem a bit excessive

[theoldman]

4. I once read that about 5% of all children are not fathered by the husband.

The divorce rate would shoot up of this became law.

[Mz Pip]

6. seems like a pretty expensive endeavor

Who would pay for this?

I think there would be privacy issues to take into consideration. Seems if there is a question then the parents involved should be the ones to make that decision, not the government.

[H2O Man]

7. Other.

I say test the mother. Can't be too careful.

[cherokeeprogressive]

8. If the person disputes having his name on the BC and pays for the test, yes. n/t

[RB TexLa]

10. If you think you did not father a child you should have to pay to prevent someone from

legally binding you to the fraud?

[cherokeeprogressive]

24. Consider the opposite side of your coin...

If the mother says he's the only person she slept with, should SHE pay for it just because HE says she slept around?

If two people are so irresponsible as to conceive a baby because they didn't use birth control, I don't want to pay for the test as a taxpayer, but neither do I want a man who is not the father of the child to be forced to pay for its support.

Either way, it's a tough call.

[Bluebear]

9. Why not wait until someone challenges paternity before wasting all this money?

[mitchtv]

12. common sense

How dare you?

[Bluebear]

14. What was I thinking?

[Travis_0004]

13. Don't require it, but subsidize it if somebody can not afford it

If somebody demands a test, the state should pay for it. (for now). If it comes back the guy is the father, he is sent the bill. If he is not the father, the mom is sent the bill. If they can not afford it, the state will subsidize some or all of the testing cost. That is what I would do.

[JI7]

20. how much does a paternity test cost ?

[PBS Poll-435]

15. What in the heck would you do with surrogate mothers/ANONYMOUS sperm donors/etc?

:shrug:

[RB TexLa]

16. Same thing you do now, they are legally removed from parental responsibility

[PBS Poll-435]

17. I realize that, but what essentially is the difference if the woman is not married?

In Texas, IIRC, if an unwed mother gives birth she is given the option to list a "father" on the Certificate, but it is not required. It can be left blank.

However, if the mother is married, the spouse's name is automatically listed on the certificate without regard to whether he is the biological father or not.

[RB TexLa]

19. And what I am saying is to be listed there should be DNA confirmation, not just someone's word.

[PBS Poll-435]

22. Ah. I see. This is more of an intellectual argument.

Each State has its own statutes regarding the issuance of vital records. And it would take quite a bit of work to have uniform standards across the US.


FWIW, if there is any kind of dispute (with EITHER party) at the time of the birth and subsequent data records entry, then a DNA test should be offered at the time (or within 48 hours.) This would be for financial responsibility requirements only, not for future custody battles, etc.

If the maternity/paternity is not in question, then I don't see justification for it.

[PBS Poll-435]

25. Wha Hapen?

:(

[kirby]

18. Better left to Maury n/t

[apocalypsehow]

21. Yes, and I'm truly mystified by anyone who would vote "no." This is a civil rights issue,

period.

If a man wants to accept being placed on the birth certificate even after he is not shown to be the biological father at the request of the mother, he should be allowed to do so if he wants to accept that responsibility. That's fine - but it's called "informed consent."

[Johonny]

23. I imagine people vote no

because they see no reason to prove to the state that they're the child's father before being listed as such. The poll isn't about if a father should be asked before being listed, it's about if they have to prove to the state through testing that they are that child's biological parent.

P.S. genetic tests aren't 100 % accurate. That should add some fun to the whole conversation.

[Bill McBlueState]

27. a civil rights issue?

If the government forces me to get a DNA test because my wife just gave birth, *that's* a civil rights issue.

[walldude]

26. So they can test the DNA of everyone in America?

No thanks. Well, now that I think about it I'm sure they would destroy the samples. The government would never intrude on someones privacy like that.... :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Lance_Boyle]

28. Why do you hate Maury Povitch? n/t