I read this report with sadness:
A man has sued his unfaithful estranged wife after discovering that he is not the father of her eight-year-old son.
The man wants the woman to return ‘every penny’ he spent on the child he thought was his but was actually fathered by someone she had an affair with.
He also wants damages to compensate for distress and wants her to reveal the name of the other man.
My sadness is because of the effect all this will have on the child. For the cheating ex-wife? Not a smidgen of pity.
In the old days, a child born within the marriage was assumed both legally and morally to be the child of the husband — and it made a great deal of sense. Nowadays, with morality in tatters but with scientific tools such as DNA testing, that old standard is unnecessary.
In fact, I believe that all babies should get DNA-tested at birth. If the baby is born to a married couple and the husband is found to be not the father, then the actual father should be identified and forced to pay child support. If the woman is unmarried, of course, then the same should apply. (If she doesn’t know who the father is, then everything that follows is her own fault.)
Adultery that results in pregnancy should carry a penalty of some sort. The husband should not be penalized for his wife’s infidelity and carelessness. Good grief: if sperm donors are being forced to pay child support (as is beginning to happen in Europe — pure foolishness), then Roger The Lodger should have to face the same consequence.
“I believe that all babies should get DNA-tested at birth.”
============
Agreed.
I also believe doing so will reveal this sort of thing (where the husband is not the father) is more frequent than anyone imagined.
Which will rapidly be curbed if testing becomes the norm.
But Team Women will not let that happen because they don’t want to give up their opportunities to get some on the side without consequence.
While I agree with DNA testing, I don’t hold with child support. As long as women can unilaterally choose to kill their own children prior to birthing them, then men shouldn’t be held accountable for the consequences of the woman’s choice to not do so. Repeal Roe v. Wade and then an argument can be made for paternal responsibility.
And the old “it takes two to tango” argument doesn’t fly. The decision to abort, or not, is 100% the *woman’s* call. As long as the man has no authority, he should likewise have no responsibility. Her body? Her choice? Then *her* responsibility. Enjoy the equality.
I cannot disagree. Women want to be strong and independent?, then they should really live up to those words and eschew any support from a man. But, as it has always been, women want the rights and privileges of a thing without the responsibilities and consequences that come with it; why, that’s a man’s job!
The sad thing about all of this is the innocents who get hurt: the children involved. They pay the price of poor decision-making skills both before birth (abortion) and after birth (divorce).
As an aside, my ex-wife thought she was going to get a certain amount of support from me from talking to her girlfriends. It turned out, however, that she only got 2/3 what she was planning on, so she was, and still claims to be, struggling. Our son is now working and contributing, so things are better financially in that household. But my support ends in about nine months, so I can already hear the wailing. Oh well, she should have kept her knickers up. (And yes, the boy is mine…apparently camping trips help with fertility.)
There was an old woman of Cape Cod,
who thought she was in bed with God,
but it wasn’t Almighty,
who crept up her nightie,
it was Roger the Lodger, the sod!
I can remember a woman I worked with in my first job after high school. She was about 7 months pregnant. She had the father narrowed down to about 5 or so potentials. She was looking at a DNA test to prove paternity, but that was in the early ’90s and they were insanely expensive.
Some years ago I saw a report to this effect.
Medical professionals were asked: if you had information showing that a child could not be the offspring of its purported father, such as the child’s mother’s husband, would you inform the purported father? Nearly all said they would not.
Which is scary. To be sure, there are cases where speaking could lead to murder.
OTOH, there are also cases where the husband already knows, and doesn’t want anyone else to know, having emotionally adopted the child.
OYAH, DNA testing to confirm parentage would prevent cases of accidental incest.
When my daughter was born, the doctor asked me if I wanted to know her blood type.
“It’s A+”, I said.
“How did you know?”
“Because if it wasn’t, the wife and I were going to have a few words.”
(We’re both A+)