View Poll Results: Should DNA testing be mandatory for all births?

Voters
48. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    36 75.00%
  • No

    12 25.00%
Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 85

Thread: Men Raising Children Not Their Own / Should DNA Testing Be Mandatory For All Births?

  1. #41
    Renewed
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    QuietWind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German-American
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Family
    Jaded
    Posts
    2,192
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Post Re: One in 25 men might be raising another’s child

    Quote Originally Posted by NordicPower88

    The German population is in decline, so its a good incentive but not good enough since it doesnt appear to be working. The culture is what needs to change.
    I agree with you, and that was what I was saying. People need to wake up and realize that they are not reproducing at even a replacement level. I realize that monetary incentives are not the answer. The reason that couples are not reproducing is not generally a financial issue-- at least not in the US. Usually, those who are less financially secure are the ones that do have more children (true for all races), and those who are more financially secure tend to produce less offspring and wait until later in life to do so. Like I said...in the US this is true. I cannot speak for reasons why Europeans are not reproducing more children.
    "I do not know what horrified me most at that time: the economic misery of my companions, their moral and ethical coarseness, or the low level of their intellectual development." Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

  2. #42
    Progressive Collectivist
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Agrippa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Last Online
    Monday, January 31st, 2011 @ 09:22 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Subrace
    Atlantid
    Location
    Asgard
    Gender
    Politics
    Progressive Collectivist
    Religion
    Catholic
    Posts
    6,968
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    11
    Thanked in
    11 Posts

    Post Re: One in 25 men might be raising another’s child

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer
    I cannot speak for reasons why Europeans are not reproducing more children.
    Radical emancipation and feminism together with a career oriented and invidiualistic, hedonistic-materialistic outlook in which family or children are neither a value nor do they lead to social recognition. Finally not all women are nor ever were naturally family people, especially for a certain group if they have the choice, children were there for power, prestige and as a helping hand too. Now, because all that things doesnt exist any more, are no longer important, but childen are a "problem" for personal freedom, financial situation, career etc., they simply protract it, they lie to themselves oftentimes, like, "I search for the right (ideal) man", or wait "for the perfect career and financial situation", things which usually dont occur in time in too many, if they even were honest to themselves. More and more dont want children anyway, categorically.
    As for the social difference, well, people without a career and the intelligence to use contraceptives get children, because they simply dont plan. Career women on the other hand might work 10 hours a day, where should the children fit in? This liberalcapitalistic anti-values and structures just dont motivate intelligent people to get children at all. If, they only motivate the very poor one which dont plan or can use the children to get more help or let them work for them etc.

    The only exception are values and people which simply want children in their life, without that, from an liberalcapitalistic-individualistic point of view, "irrational decisions", we wouldnt have any children, especially in the higher educated class. In Hamburg, a very left liberal city without too much traditonal values, but a high social and economic stress, women which studied, which are academics have with 40 years up to 40-50 percent not even one children and thats typical.

    Children must bring individuals an objective personal advantage too, in a liberalcapitalistic society, they mainly cost something, but individually, others might profit from those raising children. Even the immigration of already educated foreigners can be argued that way, because to raise children in the West and to finance their education is much more expensive than "buying" a finished, well educated worker who might cost the state and people nothing until he comes and might work for less than the indigenous too.
    Liberalcapitalism is just a virus, deadly for the group which gets infected, the group must be degraded and finally even die on the long run, thats inevitable, the ideology and social structures are anti-group and asocial oriented, absolutely destructive from a biological perspective, not just for the racial group and the better variants because of contraselection intra- and interculturally, but because the uncontrolled use of natural ressources and destruction of the biosphere too.
    Last edited by Agrippa; Tuesday, September 27th, 2005 at 10:12 PM.
    Magna Europa est patria nostra
    STOP GATS! STOP LIBERALISM!

  3. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Last Online
    Thursday, March 30th, 2017 @ 05:01 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    German and English
    Subrace
    Nordid
    mtDNA
    H
    Country
    Prussia Prussia
    State
    Teutonic Order Teutonic Order
    Gender
    Zodiac Sign
    Aquarius
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Student
    Politics
    Ethnocentrism
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    1,823
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Post Re: One in 25 men might be raising another’s child

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer
    Obesity in America seems to be a popular topic on Skadi and I know that this has been pointed out before, but several European countries are much more obese than America is-- before you start pointing fingers.

    Deaths by it: http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/mor_obe_cap
    percentages (don't knwo why US is not listed when it certainly is on other charts): http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/hea_obe#

    This one is interesting:

    http://www.vexen.co.uk/countries/best.html

    http://www.iotf.org/oonet/milaninit.htm

    And, just to clear things up, no, not even close to 70% of Americans are obese. http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/trend/maps/

    I wasn't especially pointing the finger at Americans, even though on the whole europeans seem a lot thinner, and get outside more often.

    Also, I don't want to be rude, but I never said that 70% of Americans were obese. 70% of Americans are however, overweight. Overweight is, of course, quite different than obese, and overweightness is almost acceptable for me.



    I was just thinking of America's situation because if was being spoken of the most and I am from the US myself, so naturally I know a bit more about the situation there. The only other situation I can speak of from experience is here in northern Germany where I now live. And here there are neither many overweight people (and vitually no obese people) nor many race mixers. Both of the aforementioned cultural-based "sicknesses" are much more rare here than where I am from (southeastern Michigan). So as for northern Germany there is not much to say on the subject.
    Last edited by GreenHeart; Saturday, October 15th, 2005 at 06:57 PM.

  4. #44
    Renewed
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    QuietWind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German-American
    Country
    United States United States
    Gender
    Family
    Jaded
    Posts
    2,192
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    5
    Thanked in
    5 Posts

    Men Raising Children Not Their Own / Should DNA Testing Be Mandatory For All Births?

    This thread is not about men who choose to be step fathers, nor men who choose to adopt. It is about men who are raising children that they believe to be theirs, but are actually not.

    Some time ago, I read this article about fathers who discover their child is not biologically theirs. One thing that the article brings up is that some men are advocating mandatory paternity testing at birth for all infants.

    The poll above reflects this question: Do you believe that paternity testing should be mandatory at birth for all infants?

    Why or why not?

    What do you feel are the pros and cons to such measures?

    Do you feel there are other options to this problem?

    What would you do if you found out the child you were raising was not biologically yours?

    If you have not read the article linked above, I would encourage you to read it. I do feel that the tone of the article is a bit skewed (it is in a men's magazine, btw).

    Finally, before I give my opinion on the matter I wanted to emphasize that this thread is not intended for use to bash women. If that is your agenda, then please click the red X in the upper right hand corner now. No one cares about your personal feelings towards women.


    This is my view on the topic of mandatory DNA testing for all infants:

    I feel that mandatory DNA testing operates under the assumption that all women are whores. The majority suffer because of the minority.

    It also places all men in a position of doubt. From the time a woman concieves, the man will begin to doubt that the infant is his until he gets his results. Pregnancy is a time for a man to begin bonding with his wife and child. If a man is concerned that the infant is not his, then he is less likely to take an active part in the pregnancy. This can create undue stress upon the woman. It also can increase her risk of depression, as her hormones are fluctuating. Stress may be harmful to the infant as well (the research is mixed on stress during pregnancy). It can also lead to abuse, if the man verbally expresses his doubts about his wife's pregnancy.

    A third thing related to mandatory DNA testing is that the results do not come back right away, and will probably take much longer if there becomes a back log of testing (because of the sheer number of tests that will be required). This may prevent a man from wanting to bond with his newborn out of fear that it is not his. It can cause problems between he and his wife. It causes stress on the new mother, and can push her into post-partum depression.

    Who will pay for all these tests? The parents of the infant? The insurance companies?

    What if the baby is his? He is unable to go back and be a part of her pregnancy or to take back all those ugly things he may have said about her. He can not go back and bond with his newborn, or be the first to hold the child.

    What if it isn't his? He now has the option to forgive his wife for her lies and choose to raise the baby as his own.... or he can choose to dissolve the relationship and have nothing to do with the baby. I would agree with those who say that it is better for him to find out as early as possible rather than discovering it years later. It certainly is better, but with mandatory DNA testing one must ask-- does the benefit outweigh the cost? Does the benefit to the few outweigh the potential cost to many? How many relationships will be shattered by misguided distrust based upon a potential outcome that is not very likely?

    Statistically, men cheat more than women. It is a fact. There is no test for men. Yet if women are DNA testing with every child they birth it is like placing a cheating test on women. A safeguard against cheating women, yet nothing for men. It is like we see in Islamic societies-- let's stone the women while the men go free.

    As far as men who discover late that the child is not theirs.....
    I find it sad that a man would disown a child after finding out that child was not biologically his. It is not the child's fault. The child is innocent. The child has formed a bond with a man who is believed to be the dad. The child has complete love and respect for this man. Being a father is not about DNA. Anyman can be a sperm donor, but it takes a real man to stand up and be a dad. I realize that these men did not choose to be a father to another man's child. They did not make a conscious choice with their wife to adopt a child or to become a step father to her children. They were lied to and tricked. Sad as it may be, it is not the child's fault. If the men choose to divorce their spouse, I am fine with that. If the men choose to petition the court to avoid any financial responsibility, I am fine with that as well. What I am nto fine with is if the man decides to disown the child and have nothing to do with the child, after the child has already formed a father-child bond with this man. It is unfair to the child to punish that child for the sins of the mother.

    I am not against paternity testing. I am against mandatory testing for all women.
    "I do not know what horrified me most at that time: the economic misery of my companions, their moral and ethical coarseness, or the low level of their intellectual development." Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

  5. #45
    Senior Member Löwenherz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Online
    Thursday, July 14th, 2016 @ 09:08 AM
    Ethnicity
    English/German/Scottish/Dutch
    Ancestry
    Saxony-Anhalt
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Age
    61
    Family
    Yes
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Let's talk...
    Posts
    159
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Agreed. It's a tax on sound relationships to subsidize weak relationships.

    I don't need a DNA test to know my children are mine.

    I don't want to have to pay for a bunch of tests someone else has decided should be forced upon me.

    I don't want to set up a government bureaucracy to steal more tax money and redistribute it and regulate everyone's behavior and create suspicion where none is warranted and generate a huge database of highly personal information that could be misused in many ways.

    No thanks.

    Let the men who have some reason to suspect that they have been cuckolded grow the cojones to demand a test. Leave the rest of us alone.

  6. #46
    Senior Member SwordOfTheVistula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Sunday, July 1st, 2012 @ 12:21 PM
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    50% German, 25% English, 25% Irish
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Virginia Virginia
    Location
    Washington DC
    Gender
    Age
    40
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Construction, writer/editor
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Atheist
    Posts
    2,984
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    I don't know if it should be mandatory, but it seems a wise move, a small effort which could potentially avert traumatic effects down the road.

    Quote Originally Posted by QuietWind View Post
    What would you do if you found out the child you were raising was not biologically yours?
    Out the door ASAP.

    Quote Originally Posted by QuietWind View Post
    I feel that mandatory DNA testing operates under the assumption that all women are whores. The majority suffer because of the minority.
    Not everyone is a thief-but I still lock my car & apartment doors all the time. Just in case someone is.


    Quote Originally Posted by QuietWind View Post
    It also places all men in a position of doubt. From the time a woman concieves, the man will begin to doubt that the infant is his until he gets his results. Pregnancy is a time for a man to begin bonding with his wife and child. If a man is concerned that the infant is not his, then he is less likely to take an active part in the pregnancy. This can create undue stress upon the woman. It also can increase her risk of depression, as her hormones are fluctuating. Stress may be harmful to the infant as well (the research is mixed on stress during pregnancy). It can also lead to abuse, if the man verbally expresses his doubts about his wife's pregnancy.

    A third thing related to mandatory DNA testing is that the results do not come back right away, and will probably take much longer if there becomes a back log of testing (because of the sheer number of tests that will be required). This may prevent a man from wanting to bond with his newborn out of fear that it is not his. It can cause problems between he and his wife. It causes stress on the new mother, and can push her into post-partum depression.

    Who will pay for all these tests? The parents of the infant? The insurance companies?

    What if the baby is his? He is unable to go back and be a part of her pregnancy or to take back all those ugly things he may have said about her. He can not go back and bond with his newborn, or be the first to hold the child.

    What if it isn't his? He now has the option to forgive his wife for her lies and choose to raise the baby as his own.... or he can choose to dissolve the relationship and have nothing to do with the baby. I would agree with those who say that it is better for him to find out as early as possible rather than discovering it years later. It certainly is better, but with mandatory DNA testing one must ask-- does the benefit outweigh the cost? Does the benefit to the few outweigh the potential cost to many? How many relationships will be shattered by misguided distrust based upon a potential outcome that is not very likely?

    As far as men who discover late that the child is not theirs.....
    I find it sad that a man would disown a child after finding out that child was not biologically his. It is not the child's fault. The child is innocent. The child has formed a bond with a man who is believed to be the dad. The child has complete love and respect for this man. Being a father is not about DNA. Anyman can be a sperm donor, but it takes a real man to stand up and be a dad. I realize that these men did not choose to be a father to another man's child. They did not make a conscious choice with their wife to adopt a child or to become a step father to her children. They were lied to and tricked. Sad as it may be, it is not the child's fault. If the men choose to divorce their spouse, I am fine with that. If the men choose to petition the court to avoid any financial responsibility, I am fine with that as well. What I am nto fine with is if the man decides to disown the child and have nothing to do with the child, after the child has already formed a father-child bond with this man. It is unfair to the child to punish that child for the sins of the mother.
    That seems more like an argument for it than against it. If it was in fact mandatory, there wouldn't be people finding out when the kid is age 12, and there wouldn't be marital strife if it was "we're doing this because everyone has to" instead of "wtf don't you trust me?"

    Quote Originally Posted by QuietWind View Post
    There is no test for men.
    No test for women you mean-but it's rather obvious why-only in cases of freak hospital switchings does a woman end up thinking a child is hers when it isn't. I think there actually may be tests for women, just that they are almost never used for obvious reasons.
    Contact Congress on immigration
    Contact Congress to reject banker bailout
    "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." --Ben Franklin

  7. #47
    Senior Member Psychonaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Last Online
    Wednesday, May 18th, 2016 @ 01:34 AM
    Ethnicity
    Acadian
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Pennsylvania Pennsylvania
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Politics
    Old Stock Nativism
    Religion
    Heathen Theosophy
    Posts
    928
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by SwordOfTheVistula View Post
    That seems more like an argument for it than against it. If it was in fact mandatory, there wouldn't be people finding out when the kid is age 12, and there wouldn't be marital strife if it was "we're doing this because everyone has to" instead of "wtf don't you trust me?"
    This is actually a really good point. I think that it would be infinitely better for the parentage of the child to be known from the get go rather than a father raising a child not his own. I don't really see how DNA testing can be considered a bad thing. Perhaps my religious views are heavily informing my opinion here, as ancestry and heritage is paramount to us, but I loathe the thought of unknowingly raising another man's child. I emphasize unknowingly because I am a stepfather to my wife's daughter, and I imagine there's a huge difference between willfully entering into that type of relationship and having it thrust upon you while you weren't looking.
    "Ocean is more ancient than the mountains, and freighted with the memories and the dreams of Time."
    -H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #48
    Senior Member Löwenherz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Last Online
    Thursday, July 14th, 2016 @ 09:08 AM
    Ethnicity
    English/German/Scottish/Dutch
    Ancestry
    Saxony-Anhalt
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Age
    61
    Family
    Yes
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Religion
    Let's talk...
    Posts
    159
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Psychonaut
    I don't really see how DNA testing can be considered a bad thing.
    I don't think anyone has argued yet that DNA testing is inherently evil. Are you suggesting that it should be government enforced?

    And who pays for this if it IS enforced? The cheapest test I know of is $400. Does the government force each couple to pay for their own (à la the marriage license)? Or does the government 'pay' for it with tax dollars or freshly printed money?

  9. #49
    Senior Member Psychonaut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Last Online
    Wednesday, May 18th, 2016 @ 01:34 AM
    Ethnicity
    Acadian
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Pennsylvania Pennsylvania
    Gender
    Age
    36
    Politics
    Old Stock Nativism
    Religion
    Heathen Theosophy
    Posts
    928
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Löwenherz View Post
    I don't think anyone has argued yet that DNA testing is inherently evil. Are you suggesting that it should be government enforced?

    And who pays for this if it IS enforced? The cheapest test I know of is $400. Does the government force each couple to pay for their own (à la the marriage license)? Or does the government 'pay' for it with tax dollars or freshly printed money?
    Enforced? No.

    However, if a test is to be done at all, it would be better for all parties involved if the test took place just after the child's birth.
    "Ocean is more ancient than the mountains, and freighted with the memories and the dreams of Time."
    -H.P. Lovecraft

  10. #50
    Bloodhound
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Jäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Atlantean
    Gender
    Posts
    4,380
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    19
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    65
    Thanked in
    37 Posts
    I think yes it should. SotV made already a good point, and I think it will in general be a discouragement for cheating. Genetic testing should be done anyways due to eugenic considerations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Löwenherz View Post
    I don't think anyone has argued yet that DNA testing is inherently evil. Are you suggesting that it should be government enforced?
    Yes, taxes should be paid for what benefits the group you are living in. Paying no taxes at all is no end in itself, there have to be sacrifices for the group.
    The sole question is whether it is good for the group or bad.
    "Nothing is more disgusting than the majority: because it consists of a few powerful predecessors, of rogues who adapt themselves, of weak who assimilate themselves, and the masses who imitate without knowing at all what they want." (Johann Wolfgang Goethe)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: Saturday, December 9th, 2017, 01:49 AM
  2. Men Are Getting Weaker - Because We’re Not Raising Men
    By Reginleif in forum Men, Women, & Relationships
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Thursday, August 18th, 2016, 03:05 PM
  3. Questions on Y-DNA Testing
    By ubbe in forum Genealogy & Ancestry DNA
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Friday, January 1st, 2010, 12:23 AM
  4. Ten Tips for Raising Children of Character
    By Haldís in forum Parenthood & Family
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Saturday, June 10th, 2006, 09:10 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •