Is Paternity Fraud really a “ticking time bomb”?
Apparently there are millions of fathers around the world who are, unwittingly, raising other men’s children as their own. Worse still, if it can be worse, they have all been duped at the hands of wicked mothers, who care not for a partner’s “right” to know the truth. This horrifying behaviour is called “Paternity Fraud”.
Matthew Syed has written about Paternity Fraud in today’s Times:
“It hardly needs stating that this is scandalous. To put the interests of the child above the father’s right to know may sound benign but it is deeply pernicious. Imagine a man whose bank account is covertly robbed to pay for the upbringing of a child with whom he has no kinship. To inform the man of the fraud would clearly be contrary to the interests of the child. Would we really say that he should not be told?”
The feature cites cases of celebrities who have attempted to escape the consequences of their paternity. It quotes statistics which, at closer range, appear to be largely unproven. Mr Syed’s view about Paternity Fraud – or “PF”, as he calls it – is as follows:
“PF is unlike any other crime: it is a deception that reaches deep into our evolutionary selves. The urge to propagate one’s genes, to nurture one’s own flesh and blood, is the most basic of all impulses. A single DNA test might not merely unravel a lifetime of commitment; it could make a mockery of one’s raison d’être.”
I carefully read through this article several times, and tried to find the relevant statistical evidence to back up the claims about those millions of duped men across the planet. I found little. There are references made to a “current best estimate” and “unpublished data”, which apparently adds up to tens of thousands of men in this country and tens of millions worldwide. However hard data, to prove these claims beyond reasonable doubt, is not in evidence.
So is this issue as rampant and universal as Mr Syed would have us believe? He can only quote from one unpublished survey, which drew upon DNA samples from an unnamed number of “volunteer families” in the UK and identified an estimated Paternity Fraud rate of 7 per cent. Among a group of volunteer Ashkenazi Jews, the estimated Paternity Fraud rate was nil. The hysteria makes for good headlines, certainly, but is it founded in fact?
In the UK there were no restrictions on paternity tests until the Human Tissue Act 2004 came into force in September 2006. Section 45 states that it is an offence to possess without appropriate consent any human bodily material with the intent of analysing its DNA. Legally declared fathers have access to paternity testing under the new regulations, provided the parental DNA being tested is their own. They may not test other people’s DNA without their consent. Tests may however be ordered by courts when proof of paternity is required and the Ministry of Justice accredits bodies that can conduct this testing.
So should there ever be an unqualified and unregulated “right to know” as this journalist suggests, without recourse first of all to the courts to consider the whole matter in detail? I could not disagree more strongly.
The journalist argues for the rights of the father over the rights of the child. But that is not how the law relating to children is applied. The welfare of the (wholly innocent) child takes precedence and is paramount. Once a case comes to court I of course accept that honesty and the “right to know” is the most likely outcome, it being generally accepted that it is usually in the best interests of the child to know its origins.
But it isn’t a foregone conclusion and if there are cogent reasons, such as compelling psychiatric evidence that a child will be profoundly harmed by being told the truth, the court will have to weigh up the pros and cons and make a carefully considered order. They will always act on the fundamental basis that the welfare of the child is paramount and consider if the most serious long-term harm could be caused to a child who casually learns the truth of his or her parentage.
In any event, for all those tens of thousands of fathers who we are led to believe may be fretting about the paternity of their children, consider this: does it really matter whether a child is the biological offspring of his or her father? Does it really matter if a loving father and his child never find out? What harm is being done to the man, child or woman concerned – that is until they find out and the predictable fallout occurs? And yes, I have noted the practical arguments about possible, unintentional incest in the future– but is that barely a possibility, let alone a probability?
As a divorce lawyer who has acted for some 10,000 clients over the past 25 years, I wearied of the blame game long ago. I have spent my professional life advising many, many men and women who have been caught in the adultery trap. They are not monsters; they are human beings.
Nor do I believe that women who have had affairs are fundamentally wicked creatures who should be required to confess all, if they have become pregnant by one man and have decided to save their relationship by shielding a partner and child – and, in most cases, themselves – from the truth.
Human beings aren’t robots. Life happens to all of us. In the cases that I encounter, the truth has come out and the relationship has cracked beyond repair. In such cases the divorce won’t necessarily have been caused by the adulterous actions, but by the subsequent knowledge of those actions and the inability of both parties to move on.
In Webb v Chapman [2009] EWCA Civ 55 a father tried to sue his ex-wife for deceiving him over the paternity of her daughter. The couple divorced after a DNA test when the child was over 18 showed that the husband was not in fact the daughter’s genetic father. He unsuccessfully claimed damages against his ex-wife and her new partner at Bournemouth County Court and applied, unsuccessfully, to the Court of Appeal for permission to appeal against the ruling of the court below. Given all the hassle caused, I wonder, was it ultimately worth it?
The “right to know” is also acknowledged by Mr Syed to have wrought appalling effects on fathers who have found out the truth: “anger, angst and even metaphysical confusion”. He acknowledges that the ripple effect of knowing the truth has serious ramifications, not only for the man and woman, but also for the child. Not forgetting the siblings, the wider family, the biological father, the community and so on.
So here is a question to which I have no doubt you will all have different opinions. Can all that harm and all that trauma be justified simply because of the man’s “right to know”?
I don’t think it is. I don’t support the decision by Boots to sell paternity testing kits over the counter. Experience has taught me, time and time again, that no good comes of opening Pandora’s Box. All over the world, people make mistakes. Sometimes they come to regret those mistakes. But “knowing” at the expense of an innocent child and the wider families seems to me to be selfish beyond measure. Sometimes in society we consider our “rights” to be so sacrosanct, so precious and important, we become deliberately or unintentionally oblivious of the harm that “rights” can do to others.
As a pragmatist, a realist and someone who is firmly on the side of the wholly innocent child, I believe that the “right to know” should always come second. And as for selling paternity kits over the counter? They should be banned.
|
Share this post
|
Get free family law updates
|
Marilyn Stowe’s new book: expert advice on all aspects of divorce, for just 99p!
Divorce & Splitting Up by Marilyn Stowe is the essential how-to book for anyone who is getting divorced or splitting up from a partner. Read more >>
"A must buy that really opens your eyes to what is involved if you are considering or going through a divorce." - Amanda Brown
"This will answer your questions in a way that non-lawyers can understand." - Miss P.
"This really has helped me to see that there is light at the end of the tunnel and I will come out of it a stronger person." - J
Awards
IAML
42 Comments
Katie Leaver on October 28, 2011 at 12:23 pm
Paternity is such a delicate issue and really needs to be weighed up before establishing the truth. Do you think there will ever be a common consensus on the issue?
Katie Leaver, LondonlovesJobs
Thomas on November 22, 2011 at 2:16 am
I am currently facing this very issue. Although I harbor no animosity or resentment toward the child (a victim also), it is impossible for me to even think about this child without realizing the deception and lies that I may have fallen victim to. I may have lost 16 years of my life for staying with a women I could not stand, all for “best interest of the child”. The best interest of the child is the TRUTH! Of course one must understand that Child Support Agencies across the nation love to use this “best interest of the child” BULLSHIT argument because they have an incentive to maintain every order at the highest level they can. What incentive one may ask? The Federal Government robs your money from the Social Security Trust Fund and gives it to the “Department of Health and Human Services” of each State, the amount they get is determined by the number and dollar amount of orders the Child Support Agency can have on the books. Simply put the more orders at the highest possible amount = more dollars for the department, all under the guise of operating as if they are a “Save the Children Foundation” and society buys it hook line and sinker unaware that the Feds are using their Social Security money to pay for it all. The reality is, that those who raise this “best interest of the child” argument really mean best interest of the Department. It is not realistic to think that most men are going to maintain a normal father /child relationship if or when the man finds out he has been duped by some lying conniving b**&%. In my case the mother cheated on me numerous times, was abusive and stole from my family . I am not responsible for cleaning up her lying mess! If the child is not mine then it is up to her to explain it to him because I will be out of it. All I request is for you readers, not to judge these fathers until you have walked in their shoes! Do you expect a POW to continue to maintain a relationship with his captors? NO, you would not. Do you really think that just because a court may be persuaded to base their decision on the “best interest of the child” argument, that is will make a man maintain a relationship that likely would have never even occurred had he only knew the truth? Of course it is not really about maintaining a father/child relationship it is about maintaining a cash cow for the Department! Think about this, if you were wrongly imprisoned and DNA could clear you, do you feel you would have a right for testing? Or, do you feel it is in the best interest of the family of the victim that you remain in prison so they can have some closure? Fact is a crime is a crime and these women who commit paternity fraud need held accountable, it is fraud and they should be charged with it!
Pippa on March 8, 2012 at 3:28 pm
If the concept of a Big Society is to be reached in this country there needs to be acceptance that Paternity Fraud should be pursued with the same venom as all other types of fraud.
Fathers that pay child support should have open access to paternity tests; the right to peace of mind testing should be offered to all fathers that pay through the CSA. The stigma of requesting tests needs to be removed; it is not just fathers attempting to abdicate financial responsibility.
I am sadly all to aware of the holes in the system; fathers that have been knowingly duped have no legal recourse within the UK whilst mothers that have significantly financially gained through dishonesty are allowed to blissfully continue as it is in the emotional interests of the cuckoo child to maintain the status quo.
Where do the rights of the cuckoo child end and the rights of the second family begin?
The right of the cuckoo child to discover the identity of the biological parent is also not enshrined in law. So the deceit can never truly be unravelled.
The enterprising woman who knowingly names a different man to the biological father for financial gain should be punished legally and forced to name the biological father.
Sadly, as long as someone is paying and someone is taking responsibility for cuckoo children the laws will not be toughened up.
In any other case of fraud the accomplices identity would be established and the fraudster would be punished further for not disclosing such individuals.
Emotion needs to be removed and the principle that miscarriages of justice should be corrected and people that gain financially through fraudulent activities need to be punished; corner stones of UK Law in all other aspects.
What better lesson to teach children than cheaters never prosper?
Richard on May 31, 2012 at 10:30 pm
After reading the above and the comments by Pippa and Thomas.
I agree with Pippa that fraud is fraud regardless of who is involved. I feel that it is correct to remove the emotion and look at the FACTS. Once established that a paternity fraud has taken place, would that stop or interfere with parenting. Maybe but regardless of the facts it is important to realise that parenting must continue to be constructive even if as a result a relationship breaks down.
Isnt setting good examples for your offspring globally much more important than the feelings of one individual.
There are far to many examples of excuses used and not enough valid reasons. You only have to watch one or two episodes of Jeremy Kyle to see that in action. Where has the responsibility and accountability gone.
mike on June 27, 2012 at 10:30 am
What an absolutley appalling attitude! I was kept from my daughter for 18 months over the PF committed by my then partner who thought it was up to her to decide who daddy was and cover up her affair.
Sureley every child has a right to know who they’re parents are?
It would seem most of the comments are in this vein so perhaps its time you woke up and smelt the coffee?
Marilyn Stowe on June 27, 2012 at 11:06 am
Mike
If you read the rest of my blog you will see that I appear to be a lone voice seeking parental rights enshrined in law in relation to children.
However that is always subject to the welfare of the child and in such a very delicate situation, the welfare of the child should always trump the conduct of the mother however unforgiveable it may be.
Ultimately I would expect a court to order a child to be told of his or her paternity, but sometimes that might not be until the child has come of age.
I dont support the proposition that in such circumstances a child should simply be told without the most careful consdieration and the involvement of the court.
Marilyn
Observer on June 27, 2012 at 10:06 pm
I was not aware of how common this is, and have no doubts at all that it is as common as they say.
I am not surprised one bit to learn this, though, and would not be surprised if we also learned how desperately the state has tried to cover this sort of thing up.
This is just another pathological symptom of how children are treated as goods/possessions by the all-powerful institution called motherhood under late capitalism. It is not the mothers’ fault so much as the expectations placed upon them within an highly unethical free market economy. I really do worry about the extent to which motherhood has become an institution and instrument of state control.
I do believe (and I think any child who has been the victim of such heinous deception on the part of their mothers) that the immediate truth is less painful than one learned later, when it is realized one’s whole life has been a lie.
From the state’s point of view, obviously, the more criminal deception the better; that way, some victim of a dad has to foot the bill instead of the state. This would also explain how something like this has become so common.
From the child’s point of view, however, it will be traumatic once the truth gets out, as it always does, somewhere along the line. This type of thing is life-ruining, and it is the type of thing that perhaps only a father could have the foresight to appreciate.
I therefore have to disagree with Marilyn that waiting is the best thing to do, and think that fathers should have the right to request paternity checks at birth to avoid these crimes from being drawn out.
Richard on July 11, 2012 at 5:50 pm
Why is it socially unacceptable to ask for a paternity test ?
Why should I just trust someone’s word on this issue or any man for that matter ??????
I think Paternity Fraud should be a criminal offence and where a mother is found guilt of committing this crime, then any future offspring should be automatically tested, to determine the father.
Kelly on July 30, 2012 at 3:31 pm
This lady couldn’t be more wrong. If I found the hospital had given me the wrong child I would cry.
LegalExpert on July 30, 2012 at 10:30 pm
It’s not that she is wrong Kelly. It’s that we’ve had decades of mind-washing about the unimportance of dads, to the point where paternity is just about the least important thing in the world. That is what makes it easy for people to be insensitive to the feelings of dads regarding such things, and that is what allows the abuse of children to continue in this country.
Dave on October 19, 2012 at 5:25 pm
Using the logic in the article, one can easily create why raped women should never report their story to the police
Nesa Simon David on November 5, 2012 at 1:08 pm
It’s a bit disingenious for a *woman* to be preaching to us that PF is no big deal and that men should just accept it…
What if I, a man, said that rape is “no big deal.. It’s sorta like having sex.. i mean seriously how bad can it be”?
Irlande on November 6, 2012 at 4:23 am
I am going to repeat what I have often written on blogs. The problem is most women have no idea at all what most men think and feel, but believe they know better than men what men should think.
This is because nearly 50 years ago a strong feminist movement began to demand changs in both the US and UK. And, they made a lot of effort to silence men on the needed debates. No matter how insane the changes in the laws were, men quickly learned their careers would be over if they publicly objected.
Over that 50 years, with no input from men, groups of women have decided for themselves what men SHOULD think, then accepted that as gospel truth. Any man who doesn’t agree is treated as a criminal.
Now, you have wandered so far from reality, as far as what men do think and feel, that you have actually come up with complicated reasoning why men’s feelings have no value in court, if some clever lawyer can present a theory as to why it is not in the best interest of a child to consider a man’s feelings.
There is a concept not often understood by courts and attorneys. The will to be governed. If a people lose the will to be governed, there is no power big enough to control them.
While you do the equivalent of debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, men are refusing to subject themselves to your insane marriage; divorce; and child support laws.
In a recent year, the absolute number of marriages in UK was reported as the lowest since 1895, though the population is much greater. I think it’s running around 18 per 1,000 unmarried women. US is around 33. NZ around 28.
Also, you have in the past commented about men doing the right thing by their children, with no apparent grasp that women are not doing the right thing by their children.
Historically, women doing the right thing by their children meant women waiting to have sex until they find a man willing to enter a permanent bond, agreeing to take the woman and any children he produced into his home, and support them. Also, she was expected to avoid sex with other men.
Now, you are apparently the first to believe women should not be expected to do the right thing by their children, but men are still supposed to do their traditional right thing. Are you nuts or something?
Observer on November 6, 2012 at 3:47 pm
If having a child and watching them grow up was not the greatest joy in life, I would strongly recommend that all men stay away from any form of unguarded intercourse or commitment to the female species.
That’s how rotten things are for fathers in this country who find themselves in the unfortunate position of a duped sperm donor who has now been kicked aside. And what happens when he then makes his application for this discriminatory and demeaning thing called contact? We all know that story?
George on November 7, 2012 at 1:17 pm
I cannot agree more with Irlande !
Tera on November 8, 2012 at 11:04 pm
To those people who think it’s OK to withhold a father’s right to know if he is the actual biological father – consider the discovery of a mix-up in a maternity ward a couple months after birth. Should the courts block any attempt to determine who the actual mothers are of each baby – or would we all just say “Just be happy with whichever baby you’re holding, it doesn’t really matter if the baby is yours biologically”?
Darigan Liber on December 2, 2012 at 3:21 am
I must respectfully disagree with your opinion. The issue inherent in paternity fraud isn’t really about the man’s “right to know”, but it is fundamentally about fairness.
I think I shall not belabor the points already strongly made by previous commenters. Instead, I would propose a practical solution to the problem of paternity fraud: Default Genetic Paternity Testing.
It really is rather simple. When the baby is born, or before the birth certificate is signed, hospitals should conduct a genetic paternity test, and submit the results to the father. If it is found that he is not the genetic father, then he should be given the option to accept the child or to disclaim paternity (and seek divorce for adultery). If he chooses not to go ahead with the test, or takes no action after the results, then he is statutorily estopped from denying his paternity.
It is reliable, and it is cheap (the costs are offset by the reduced expenditure on future litigation), and it is non-invasive.
More importantly, it accounts for the interests of both the man and the child. The child will never face the emotional trauma of losing a father, because the parent-child relationship has not developed.
The only counterargument might be that: “Well, we’d be depriving the child of a father nonetheless”, but 1) single parenthood is not impossible, and there are social institutions available to support the child, 2) the mother may well be able to find another willing father, and 3) the avoidance of single-parenthood alone is not sufficient justification for forcing a man to take up fatherhood responsibilities. Single parenthood is an unfortunate problem, but the solution cannot possibly be to force fatherhood on a man without his consent.
Genetic paternity testing at birth should therefore be made a default procedure.
Marilyn Stowe on December 2, 2012 at 10:27 am
Darigan
Thanks that’s interesting.
My point in this post has been misunderstood by many readers. I don’t dispute the right to know, but I strongly think the interests of the child come first. So it is ultimately a matter for the courts if this comes to light during a child’s infancy.
I agree that a partner should know if he is the father of a child he believes to be his. I’m not arguing against that. All I am saying is that there is a wholly innocent defenceless child too and the child’s interests as to if when and how must be fully ring fenced first.
Regards
Marilyn
Jim on December 2, 2012 at 12:37 pm
So, if the child’s best interest comes first why not grab a random man off the street and force him to financially support the child? He has as much biological relationship to the child as the duped father. The responsible one for this mess is the mother. Paternity fraud should be illegal and the mothers who commit it should be jailed. People don’t make mistakes, they make choices. And they must pay for them.
james on December 2, 2012 at 2:17 pm
dig this…
if the emotional bond between between and child is what feminists “worry” about, what defrauded men can do is stop paying for child support but keep the emotional bond,ie keep being the dad without paying….
after all these years of alienating men from families, women are conveniently saying that men are now important to the child!!
women should have some balls and come out and say that all they actually want is the money. they actually don’t care if the men are around.. when it comes to a divorce, the kid don’t need men, when they need they money, suddenly they have the balls to teach men fatherhood…
Marilyn Stowe on December 2, 2012 at 5:32 pm
James
What I find interesting about all those men who have commented so savagely only from their own perspective, is this:- what about their own relationship with the child? How are they able to cast off this innocent child, who they have known from birth, have nurtured raised bonded and parented: without a backwards glance caring only about money and themselves?
What kind of people are they? what type of parent are they really?
Marilyn
JamesB on December 2, 2012 at 8:18 pm
It is insane to chuck the man out and then expect the fatherhood and money without the money. It’s like expecting to have the sandy beach experience without getting it in your pants. Or pie and chips without the pie, or an electric iron without the electricity, or a car without the fuel, etc. Could spend an evening typing these. The sun without the rain, the money without the work (oh dear, bit too close to the truth that one).
But what really bugs me the most with your last post Marilyn is the emotional blackmail. Laying that thickly on to men who have been completely dumped on that they must now support the person who has done this while they date and bring the chap back to the house they paid for, and in the name of the children who the man brought up hoping they would be together and not be separate is sick really. Also, you are wrong when you say you divorce your partner and not your partner from his children that is naive and untrue and evil to advise women that. Then blaming men when the nonsense that they initiate and vicious separations they generate affect the children is also very very bad form. No, it is not on when something goes wrong to just blame the men, that is lazy and tbh I agree with the Irish chap earlier that people (myself included) will vote with our feet against that one. Indeed, so many are, I can hear them marching. Then if you marry them against their will they will bring down that law as well. As the man said, you cannot govern without consent and you and the feminists and the family law courts (and increasingly, worryingly, the Government) no longer have it. Also, it’s poor form to call the comments savage. I wonder how you would react to having everything you have worked for (including your family) taken away in the name of feminism and asked to pay for it while being insulted. Pretty savagely I’d imagine. I am surprised more people don’t get violent it is a big tribute to men that we just vote with our feet and not our fists on this bad family law system. I’m with Irlande on that.
Also, the comment that Women should have balls, did make me laugh
Merry Xmas everyone, x.
Yvie on December 3, 2012 at 12:52 pm
Sadly Marilyn, there are mothers who are completely motivated by money, even to the extent of falsly accusing fathers in the Family Courts to ensure that contact is either withheld completely or drastically curtailed. It is ‘the winner takes all mentally’, aided and abetted by current fiscal policy and in particular, the CSA, who would hound a decent father to the point of losing his home provided all due monies were paid.
I have no experience of fathers who cast off their children without a backward glance.
My own son faced the solicitor from hell in the Family Court who had no compunction in painting the blackest picture she could about my son’s capabilities as a father. She didn’t get the result she wanted however, as my son still retains his shared residence order plus in addition, half of all school holidays.
Something has become abundantly clear to me over the last two years or so and that is the children’s love for their father cannot be erased and continues to grow ever stronger. He may be financially squeezed by their mother and the CSA but everything pales into insignificance as he will always have the love of his children. No-one can prevent that, not even the ‘solicitor from hell’ who obviously felt justified in promoting conflict instead of trying to diffuse it in the Family Courts.
JamesB on December 3, 2012 at 4:15 pm
First sentence should have read, It is insane to chuck the man out and then expect the fatherhood and money without the man. To pick and choose which parts of life you will take and leave. That’s unrealistic.
JamesB on December 3, 2012 at 4:18 pm
Par for the course Yvie. Your son did well, better than me not to lose his temper and walk out. I had false accusations of child abuse and neglect levelled at me and walked out and got a day every other weekend. It’s sick the way lawyers through mud without basis around.
Friend on December 3, 2012 at 7:36 pm
“the interests of the child come first”
but every solicitor knows that there is no substance to this. on the contrary, it is this very expression that has been used for so long to justify injustice.
Friend on December 3, 2012 at 7:40 pm
“Savage” injustice and abuse of fathers naturally begets a “savage” response from fathers, which will be anything between yelling at the incompetent judge (not recommended) to exposing that savagery in the media (punishable as contempt of court, so also not recommended).
JamesB on December 3, 2012 at 10:12 pm
What do you recommended Friend?
JamesB on December 3, 2012 at 10:13 pm
I wish I took eggs with me last time I was in court. They dont show up on the metal detectors and would have felt great and less futile to throw at the judges and opposition then trying to get them to listen to anything I said.
james on December 18, 2012 at 2:29 pm
Also, i came across an article stating that paternity frauds should not be seen as a moral crime because legislating against it would amount to sexual repression of women..
now, thats true..women are biologically tuned to do this as this phenomenon is seen across animals..
the question is- what about male sexual repression??? The male members across the animal kingdom have developed their own ways to tackle the issue of paternity..when a lion usurps the position of the alpha, the first thing it does is kill all the cubs in order to ensure his own paternity.. If one has a dime’s worth of intellect, he’d know i’m NOT proposing to kill the children…
If men are walking away from someone’s else’s child, it’s PERFECTLY in his sexual right to do so…since then, he can go and try having his own child and pass on the genes…and if the state and women force men no do otherwise, they are repressing male sexuality..
james on December 18, 2012 at 2:38 pm
@Marilyn….
thats the same as what patriarchial men said when women fought for their abortion rights… women didn’t like it since men then were trying to define motherhood..
now, men in the exact situation, are morally burden by the rubbish you said to me in a reply…and this time it’s women who are doing the defining..
Marriage was an institution that artificially gave beta men the chance to have their own child…Feminists didn’t like that kind of equality and marriage is now ruined… but thats ok, i’m not big on marriage myself… but if women are allowed to EXPRESS their sexuality, so should the men…
and i’m sorry, but no man falls for that fatherhood crap that is always modelled after what feminists want..
LouieF on January 17, 2013 at 4:11 am
I read this article after reading your most recent. You state in the comments what about the child? Why is it the man who “didn’t play” responsibility to raise and pay for a child that is not his? This is fair how? What about the man who did play and somehow gets robbed of his paternal rights? Do you think he would not want to know and be a part of his child’s life? I am sorry but this is truly rubbish. As I said in a comment to your other article. What would a woman want if she found out the hospital switched her child at birth and 20 years later found out? Would she not want to know? You bet she would and since it is a woman, it is OK. It is time for men to stand up against injustice and demand fair treatment.
Alvaro Martinez on January 30, 2013 at 9:13 pm
I must say that I’m truly disturbed by this article, Marilyn. It’s stuff like this that makes me wonder if there is any hope for mankind. If my mother committed paternity fraud, I’d want to know (if that ever happened, I’d NEVER speak to my mother again; there’s NO excuse for lying about the paternity of the child).
You’re entitled to your opinion, and I’m not going to judge or condemn you, but this article makes me very sick to my stomach. Irlande hit the nail right on the head. I’ve honestly tried to understand the reasoning that feminists use to rationalize and justify crimes like paternity fraud, but I simply can’t. Men, as Irlande said, are conditioned or taught to believe in things that we don’t actually believe or feel. Deep down–despite what you may feel or think, Marylin–the majority of men don’t want to be coerced into paying for a child that’s the product of a LIE.
Mind you, I wouldn’t mind adopting a child (I understand that biology doesn’t necessarily imply fatherhood), but raising a child that’s the product of an affair is a totally different matter. There would be too much pain–because I’d be thinking of the affair every time I look at the child–and it would prevent me from having a loving relationship.
Marilyn Stowe on January 30, 2013 at 11:14 pm
Hi Alvaro
You and all the rest of the outraged fathers have all misunderstood my view. I do NOT condone paternity fraud. My concern is only for the innocent child. None of you appear to care less about the child, the child you apparently have all cared for until the moment you discover there is no genetic link. Thereafter you only care about yourselves, the child is cast out, and to me that is inexcusable.
What about the child, still the same child before and after that moment of discovery?
And if you couldn’t care less, because all that matters to you is matching genes, what kind of father were you anyhow?
Regards
Marilyn
Alvaro Martinez on January 31, 2013 at 9:20 pm
Before I start, Marylin, I should clarify that I’m not a father (yet).
“Thereafter you only care about yourselves, the child is cast out, and to me that is inexcusable.”
Uh huh…What about the “mother”? Here you are judging and condemning men for not wanting to raise kids that are the product of an affair, but I haven’t seen you once denounce “mothers” for committing such a despicable crime against their own children by lying about who their biological father is. This is unbelievable! You may not say it explicitly, but like most feminists, it seems you are (either consciously or unconsciously) biased towards the woman. Your argument regarding the “rights of the child” seems more like an excuse to abdicate the mother of any kind of responsibility for her actions.
“And if you couldn’t care less, because all that matters to you is matching genes, what kind of father were you anyhow?”
Did you read my post? I NEVER said that biology necessarily implies fatherhood. I clearly stated that adoption would be no problem for me. However, raising a kid that’s the product of an affair is a totally different matter. It would interfere with my ability to have a loving relationship with the child because I’d be thinking about the affair every time I look at him/her.
And that’s not just me, that’s a large chunk (possibly a majority) of men. You are entitled to your opinion–even though it’s silly–but you are not going to change how MANY men think. Men do NOT want to raise children that are the product of an affair. That’s the truth. This is the problem with our politically correct culture: we are conditioned or told to believe in things that we don’t actually believe in or agree with. You can continue to live in your feminist fantasy world, and you are entitled to believe whatever you want, but you are not going to convince many men of your opinions.
And, Marylin, if you want to use the “rights of the child” to shield the woman from being shamed, then I can do the same, too. What about “my right” to know whether or not my mother is a lying, deceitful woman who doesn’t take any responsibility for her actions? Believe me, if that were the case, I’d want to know about it.
I hope I didn’t come across as rude, Marylin, but honestly, this is one of the most disturbing things I’ve ever read in my life.
Regards
Alvaro
no one special on February 5, 2013 at 8:28 am
Op, if a man has no right to refute a claim that a child is his, by philanthropic guise “for the greater good of the child. Then “equally” if a man has a child by another woman other then his present partner, his present partner has no legal right to refute any claims concerning motherhood placed upon her.
I.e., if I claim you are the mother and you are not!, you have no legal right to dispute my claim, because it is for “the greater good of the child” that my lie not be questioned merely because I choose to say you are the mother.
Alvaro Martinez on March 14, 2013 at 11:11 pm
I’d like to say a few more things.
First, while I don’t think women who commit “paternity fraud” are necessarily horrible people, it is still a deeply unethical thing to do. I’m sorry if I sounded a little judgmental, Marilyn, but lying about the paternity of a child is very wrong. I like to see the best in people, but I could never be friends with a woman who deliberately lied to her husband about the paternity of the child. Not out of spite, mind you; but because I believe in honesty and personal responsibility, and because I’m a deeply religious person who takes marriage very seriously. As a man of faith (who doesn’t enjoy passing judgments) I do personally believe that “you are who you’re friends with.”
Next, your arguments about the needs of the child are not totally unfounded. But I do think we ought to be consistent. If a mother or father commits any other crime, whether or not they have children is going to be irrelevant. We aren’t going to not hand down a sentence just because they have kids. I don’t want to see the kids suffer, but if we decide to not punish the mother–because we want to protect the kids–then we’ll inevitably have to do the same for any other felony that a parent commits.
Now some people might argue that this argument wouldn’t be applicable simply because paternity fraud isn’t illegal. Well that’s true. But just because something isn’t illegal doesn’t mean it’s not a crime or that it’s not unethical. Paternity fraud should be a crime, and it should be treated as such. My opinion is that if a husband wants to lay charges, he should be able to (I’m not sure I would, but for other men who would, they should have the option).
Lastly, I want to reply to your post: “Does it really matter if a loving father and his child never find out? What harm is being done to the man, child or woman concerned – that is until they find out and the predictable fallout occurs?”
You might mean well when you wrote this, but I think this is sending a very bad message. I don’t want to resort to “slippery slopes,” Marilyn, but this kind of thinking is what inevitably could lead many women to think that lying about the child’s paternity is OK. This kind of reasoning is just what many women might do to brush off any guilt they may feel for not own up to their actions. We need to be very clear that infidelity–which results in a pregnancy–and not taking responsibility are bad things to do.
doc on April 8, 2013 at 1:42 am
Here are some claimed data that one US newspapers announced last month, based on a reliable sampling – there were over 300,000 legal paternity tests done in the year 2011, about half done on mothers’ demand and half requested by fathers who disputed paternity. There were another 300,000 ILLEGAL paternity tests done (tests done in secrecy via widely present paternity kits AND online clinics that guarantee anonymity of their clients). You can easily bet that many of those illegal tests preceded legal court battles, which just speaks about unfairness of paternity laws and jail threats that are enforced and result with some fathers being arrested. But now they can do it anonymously and keep it for themselves. About 31% of tests have proven that the alleged fathers were NOT biological fathers. This is a constant percentage which fluctuates from 26-34% of over two decades of paternity testing. add there all the children sent who, for various reasons (overwhelmingly to get state support, being sent to orphanage, sperm donors, mothers who don’t know who the father is) will not even have their father enlisted. There were about 3,65 million children born in the US for the year 2011.
Given the amount of money spent on court expenses and widespread paternity testing, plus all other cases that will never see the daylight, there is really no reason why “woman organizations” demand all the laws that shame or legally disable fathers (and children) from knowing the truth before it is too late. People have right to know, not just fathers, but children as well.
This gives more than enough reasons to have mandatory paternity testing, especially for married couples, reason to stop with the “putative fatherhood”, while establishing a federal database which help a lot to resolve any disputed paternity or to track down the runaway or unknowing fathers and resolve most problems that cuckolded fathers or single mothers are having, including state that pays in cases of absent father. In the very end, children should know who their biological parents are.
You need to acknowledge the importance of biological children for vast majority of people. I’ve recently saw the article of a woman who had cancer and refused to get cancer treatment which would prolong her life for more than 5 years, instead she insisted doctors to spare her fetus and carried on with pregnancy, she delivered her only child on this world and all comments were focused on praising her, including her husband. She died shortly after. That is how important the biological offspring is. Any commentator, including myself, can only praise the mother’s decision and acknowledge that 99,9% of us would choose the same. This is universal behavior. I don’t say anything against adoption, I praise people who do it, but that is NOT the same like being victim of paternity fraud. Women who think so should answer it for themselves if they would allow that to happen or they would choose another hospital, no affair involved at all, so it’s even easier for them to accept it, right?
I am a man who has ALMOST been a victim of paternity fraud. My wife slept with another man while we were married. We were married for three years when the child was born and I was FORCED BY LAW to stay married during her first year of childbirth because law in my state demanded it in case of a newborn child and let’s just say that I eagerly disputed the child’s paternity and wanted to get out.
Anyone who asks me why I was suspicious of my own child, let’s just say that I’ve seen everything in my life and wanted to be sure in my own offspring. There were no visible signs for me that I’m a victim of a fraud and only my decision to do the testing has saved me further nightmare.
Marilyn Stowe, I applaud you on your skills though, you have proven to be really persuasive to at least gain sympathies by some in this case, but I’d love to tell you how my lawyer constructed an answer that might pong the ball back to you. You lawyers are really great when it comes to creativity and oral skills on court… my lawyer fascinated me so much and I got another insight of how important is to have a good lawyer.
I will deliberately avoid child’s gender and will alter (real) names that my lawyer used.
After dragging the court process for as long as two years and then getting test done to prove that I was right, my ex wife’s lawyer demanded that, due to time spent with me being listed as child’s father, it will be in child’s best interest to keep me paying the child support and keep me legally obliged towards the child!
My lawyer answered it with such ease that I’d never even think of in my whole rage listening to her lawyer… he was really creative:
Imagine if my client John was a bank client and that Mrs. Marry, while working in his bank, robbed tens of thousands of dollars to support her child. Had she been caught doing that, she’d be jailed and forced to pay the money back!
I was so thrilled with his answer that I completely lost it, I laughed so hysterically in court that the judge had to warn me, I apologized several times because I was shaking so much and laughing at the same point… I was freed from paying child support and thanks to new laws I might be able to get (some) of the money I paid back to my pocket.
Mrs Stowe, verdicts that you cited are living proof that men are deliberately discriminated by both legislation and its practice, fathers are considered UNWORTHY of having the basic human rights, they are considered to be good only to serve the with their work society and their feelings are not important because they are disposable, expendable, their lives are cheap.
You are inherently suggesting that something as grave as cuckolding is supposed to be rewarded and that the victim should be further punished for one of gravest things one can do. All this should be done in an era when it can easily be solved. Just imagine if you had your only child and after 20 years of marriage you find out that you are a victim of fraud by your husband and that you have no biological children of your own… this can be done today with surrogate mother being your husband’s lover and the child being delivered to you after he impregnates her during their affair, just imagine your reaction and then think of the reasons why your should continue being the victim of not just the economical fraud but such MENTAL fraud… it can easily break even the strongest, as I know it from my sister who works in fertility clinic, there were so many desperate women who would gladly have their limbs sawed away if they could only have their biological child in their 40s, they even attempt to bribe doctors to accept their own eggs for IVF treatment!
nicolas nasr on April 13, 2013 at 11:03 pm
I discovered this blog after searching because I intuitively feel that default paternity testing is where a progressive society’s future lies. Darigan Liber has clearly outlined the simple solution to our technological coming of age. The pill has freed women (thankfully!) and despite some growing pains, society has (and still is) adapted. Now men must find their freedom: the freedom to govern their fates, be it as polygamous bachelors, monogamous fathers, or something in between. Each path has its respective responsibilities, but now thanks to DNA testing these responsibilities can and must be allocated with justice.
I’ve read all entries, and I’m fascinated by the depth and range of responses. I understand the innate outrage men (fathers and non-fathers alike) feel when relating to this issue because we are conditioned, subtly, since being little boys, to be providers, much as women are conditioned virtually from birth to be nurturers.
Infidelity is not disappearing anytime soon. Within the confines of marriage, I have cheated and I have been cheated on, so I know the deep pain caused by both sides well. It is not easy to separate oneself from the destructive need for retribution, but this issue isn’t about retribution, even though some contributions are steeped in that tone.
This is about elevating humanity’s condition to a fair and just outcome. Financial responsibility must be bestowed on biological fathers, one way or another. It’s about the fundamental, innate desire to choose to care for your progeny.
An adoptive parent has presumably considered, undoubtedly with many days of intense and profound reflection, introspection and financial calculation, the issues of raising a non-biological child.
No doubt we all make bad judgements, we are all subject to human frailties. But wounds not quickly tended to will always fester with time, dragging along an increasing circle of victims, most of them innocent. Siblings are frequently drawn into the mess.
Marilyn, you wrote “And if you couldn’t care less, because all that matters to you is matching genes, what kind of father were you anyhow?”
I sincereIy doubt this properly reflects the reality of a great majority of cuckolded fathers. When my son was a year old my wife and I separated, and she took up with another man. She claimed and obtained sole custody, which I contested and succeeded in reversing, at a considerable cost. My lawyer recommended a paternity test, which I refused (I naively told him that I wouldn’t do that to her). I fell apart and begged her to come back to me, for our son’s sake as well as mine, which she did when her adulterous relationship soured.
Ten months later I discovered she was involved with yet another man and finally understood I couldn’t keep our family together by myself no matter how hard I tried. The point is this: the weeks of waiting for paternity results were a source of great stress- I deeply loved my two-year-old and couldn’t bear not to have him in my life, but accepting him if he wasn’t mine meant sharing resources with my three biological children from my first marriage. Now which child’s interest comes first?
Imagine the years of collective pain and anguish, and the financial costs of perpetual litigation being eliminated with a simple, mandatory paternity test at birth? Knowledge brings healing, even if it is sometimes initially very painful. The sooner, the better. It’s not just the father’s right to know, it’s the right thing to do for all involved.
Wow on April 21, 2013 at 12:22 pm
Would you condone a man saving half his paychecks to keep a mistress on the side without telling his wife and children? I mean, what does it matter to them, right? As long as he can put food on their table and pay off their bills like a good slave then everything’s good, right?