Re: Denise donates the $50K to AIDS fund

In article <DDgdj.32053$Mu4.3354@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"madams53" <madams53@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"kenny blankenship" <blank@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:blank-862E61.12263428122007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Huh? Where does that question come from? The claimed father would
have to be tested before his name goes on the birth certificate. If
the mother wasn't cheating on him then that's the only test that
will need to be done. If he isn't the father, he should get to know
that as soon after the birth as possible.

Perhaps my confusion comes from misunderstanding your use of the term
"mandatory". I assumed you meant that would preclude leaving the
"father" part blank.

She can leave the father part blank (and therefore not test anyone) but
then she can't go running to the courts and suing someone for child
support. In the types of cases we're discussing, the husband is going to
be concerned if his wife doesn't want him tested or his name put on the
birth certificate.

The same "person" who pays for the rest of the prenatal care. In my
case that would be Medical Services Plan of B.C.

I forgot you live in Canada.

That's OK, eh?

In the United States, more often than not, prenatal care is provided
by private insurance companies, which are notorious for raising
rates, and kicking sick people out of hospitals before the doctor
thinks is wise. Anything which raises the rates my insurance company
has to pay is going to make my costs higher and my care worse. Those
who do not have private insurance are cared for in charity hospitals
and thru Medicaid,and get horrible care.

So, it's not worth the couple of hundred dollars it would cost to test
for fatherhood, much better to fine some poor shlubb for 18 years for
being gullible enough to believe that his wife wasn't cheating on him.

BTW: Compared to the other costs of proper pre-natal care, a DNA
test has a miniscule cost.

It might be miniscule to you, but not to citizens of the US.

I said it was miniscule compared to the total cost of proper prenatal
care. If you can't afford proper prenatal care (and a DNA test) then you
shouldn't be having a kid.

BTW: The "huge cost" of the DNA test that so many americans can't afford
yet can afford to have kids, is $89. (http://www.metaphasegenetics.com/)

Child support is not intended to be a punishment for the father,

Yet it often is, and worse, it often is for men who aren't the
father but were defrauded (by the mother) into believing they were
the father. In many other cases it's a guy who wasn't properly
served with a subpoena then lost a case by default when he didn't
show up to a court case he didn't know existed.

I notice here, that you chose not to comment on this paragraph. Why is
that?

or a boon to the mother,

Yet it often is.

Name 3

Peter, Charlie, Sanjay.

but SUPPORT for the child.

I don't buy that. There are too many ways that the father could be
required to financially support the child without having to reward
the mother with a cheque each month -- a cheque with no oversight
or evidence required that the money is being spent supporting the
child.

Yes, the father can take over sole support of the child and raise it
himself if he feels the mother is not doing a proper job. Most men do
not want the sole responsibility of raising a child.

Most men have a difficult time even getting partial custody, forget
about getting sole custody unless the mother is a drug addict *and* a
prostitute.

BTW: Why did you fail to comment on the meat of my comment. That is,
that there is no requirement for the mother to show that they money is
being spend supporting the child?

Many single mothers I know are supporting their children with no
assistance from the father,

Name three.

Audrey, Nancy. and Abagail (obviously I'm not going to give last
names.)

I can make up three first names too, see above for examples.

but I don't personally know any women who are getting rich off of
child support payments. I do know a lot of men who think their
exes are. And anybody who thinks that mandatory testing would
slow down irresponsible behaviour has evidently never been in the
backseat of a car with a willing partner.

I'll accept that you have no will power, but many other people do.

I don't believe we were talking about me. My daughter was concieved
in wedlock with my husband, and if he had asked for a DNA test, I
would have said , sure honey, as soon as you figure out how we are
going to pay for it, since we haven't finished paying for the doctor
yet.

First off, how did you manage to wait until you were married to have a
kid when irresponsible behaviour is so hard to avoid? Luck?

Second, as if you would be OK with your husband doubting your fidelity
by wanting a DNA test done to confirm his parentage. I don't buy that
for a minute.

Remember the song, "paradise by the dashboard light"? In the
heat of the moment, things like potential pregnancy and child
support payments have never mattered enough to stop many people
from being irresponsible.

Most people aren't 17 years old.

I noticed you changed my "many" to "most"

Paradise by the Dashboard Light is a song about a couple of seventeen
year olds. We aren't discussing seventeen year olds. We are discussing
guys who are defrauded by their wives into believing her *** child
is his, then after finding about about it are still on the hook for
child support.

However, I'll accept that. Most men act like they are 17 when it comes to
sex. I can see it now- your beloved says, no, darling, I won't have sex with
you because I don't want to have to have a DNA test for any child I might
get pregnant with. Yeah, that's gonna happen, and be accepted without
further argument.

There are at least eleven forms of female birth control that are all
superior to the sole form of male birth control. How about she gets some
before she does the nasty. And before you can say it. Every guy should
use a condom every single time they have sex, period.

I hardly think that mandatory DNA testing would.

It may not cut down on irresponsible behaviour all that much, but
it certainly won't increase it. Additionally many women who aren't
sure of the paternity of their spawn will opt for abortions rather
than carry the *** seed to term.

Well, since I am against abortions on demand, I feel that anything
which will increase the abortion rate is a negative.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that point. Abortions aren't
desirable but they are better than bringing an unwanted child into the
world.

If you are so whipped that you are afraid of asking for a DNA test
when you think it is called for, you shouldn't be having sex with the
woman anyway.

Any husband who, on the birth of their child, tells his wife "I want a
DNA test" is in for a world of hurt.

As mentioned above, my ex-husband would not have been.

I don't believe that. Not for a second. You would be OK with your
husband saying "I suspect you were unfaithful and I distrust you enough
that I need to have a DNA test done to confirm that I'm the child's
biological father". Sure you would.

He never doubted my daughter was his,

What a fool eh? He should have gotten the DNA test at birth, then he
could have dumped your ass and you could have gone after your baby's
daddy for child support.

but when I asked for the child support that he was 10 years behind
on, said, " I know you are taking good care of her and providing what
she needs." He really thought I was should be flattered by his
trust in me. And btw, the child support was $50 a month. I saw $100
of it. This was in the 70s. So I can actually include myself in the
list of women who supported my child alone. I didn't mention it,
though, because it was so long ago.

The guy sounds like a real loser. Why did you mary a loser? Why did you
have a kid with a loser?

it would be much better if they would concentrate on making the
existing laws more equitable for all involved,

That's a pipe dream. So is mandatory DNA testing. The pussified men
in charge would never do it. And radical feminists, like yourself,
will oppose it, loudly, because it will take away a women's ability
to scam a guy into paying her for a child that isn't his.

This line made me howl with laughter! the thought of me being a
radical feminist is hysterical to me. I am agreeing that the current
laws are inequitable.

Yet you oppose those things that would prevent men from being defrauded
into fatherhood and paying child support payments for kids that aren't
theirs.

I certainly think that inexpensive DNA testing should be made
available to those who want it to make sure that no one is scammed
into paying for a child that isn't his.

As I said, telling your wife that you don't trust her and you need to
get a DNA test is almost certainly going to cause massive problems in
any marriage. Until DNA testing is mandatory at birth, men need to
secretly test their supposed offspring at the first opportunity.

Of course, it will also make it easier to get payments from those
who are proven to be the father.

Oh sure, proven to be the father, like all the guys proven to be the
father when the mother won a default judgment against them because they
were never notified about the suit?

What is the point of proving you're not the father when the courts are
going to make you pay child support regardless?

Two of the above mentioned women are both unable to get child support
because the fathers deny paternity and the women can't afford the
DNA tests.

DNA tests, $89. (http://www.metaphasegenetics.com/).

Besides that, you take him to court and he pays for the DNA test to
prove he's not the father.

The third father is a deadbeat who doesn't keep a job, so he won't
have to pay.

Why did she marry such a loser? Why did she have a kid with such a loser?

What is inequitable about getting a DNA test before the father's
name goes on the birth certificate?

Well, perhaps in Canada you can assume that your government can make
laws without them being inequitable. Here in the US, I don't have
that assurance.

So, better to keep the inequities we have than attempt to change things?
Easy to say when the law is in your favour, I guess.

If I was having a baby, I'd want myself and my wife to get DNA
tests done after we bring it home from the hospital to make sure
there were no screw-ups in the maternity ward.

Agreed. So why not tell your wife that when you request the test and
she goes ballistic on you? What I don't agree with is that it should
be mandatory.

I'm sure she would have no problem with her getting tested, but why
would I have to get tested? Don't I trust her?
.