I have never blogged about the Jayden Headley case because it saddens me to see the child dragged through the court and splashed all over the media. This morning's revelation about a false DNA sample did trigger some thoughts however.
DNA testing for paternity is a bit of a minefield. I know at least one father's group want mandatory testing at birth. Given so many partnerships do not last and child support can cost men thousands of dollars, sometimes with no corresponding 'rights' to father, I would support voluntary DNA testing. It could be offered as routine at birth (as part of the heel prick sample?) if the mother and father request it. If the mother refuses then so be it. BUT that will certainly leave a large question mark over his paternity, at which point he may want to do what others have done and send a sample to an overseas lab. It sounds awful. I know. But a male has the right to know he is the father of a child.
Think of it like a pre-nuptial agreement. Nobody has to have, or agree to sign one, but it protects one or possibly both parties. At the same time however, asking a partner to sign a pre-nup could have the same negative effect as asking for a DNA test to be run on a newborn. What about trust? A lack of trust is not a sound basis for a relationship.
In the end it is up to the individuals involved. DNA testing for paternity should be more accessible.
Jeffrey A. Tucker: The Revolution of 2024
43 minutes ago
11 comments:
I demanded a DNA test before I signed my name on my eldest daughters birth certificate. There was some mild protest but I told the mother that it would shut up the whisperers in my family and force them to accept the truth of the situation.
She obviously had nothing to hide so agreed. $999 * 3 later I had proof I was a father.
anyone who refuses really must have something to hide. and before a lad is made to pay child support for 19 years it really should be 100% positivly proved beyond doubt the situation is as it appears.
so why can mothers deny the dna testing?? why not have the truth out in the open.
"before a lad is made to pay child support for 19 years it really should be 100% positivly proved beyond doubt the situation is as it appears"
i thought in NZ that unless a woman is married, she cannot simply fill in the father's section of the birth certificate, the (alleged) father must do this and sign it himself. why can't a man who doubts his paternity just refuse to name himself (thus avoiding child-support payments??)
Child support payments start from the time the mother names the 'father' to the IRD. She must do this to go on the DPB. If she doesn't there is a financial penalty. He doesn't even have to be on the birth certificate as far as I am aware. If the male challenges paternity he has to pay for the test (expensive)and she has to agree.(The only NZ lab that provides testing won't do them without the mothers consent.) He is guilty until proven innocent. An Aussie company that runs tests for NZ men has found 30 percent of tests showed the submitter wasn't the biological father. If anywhere near that many are currently paying child support IRD would be up for a huge refund. Hence no political will to free up or encourage testing.
I'm no expert but this is my understanding of the current situation. I am sure testing could be enforced through the courts but it's a laborious expensive process. I would be pleased to be corrected if wrong. It has always been a rather legalistically murky area.
i thought in NZ that unless a woman is married, she cannot simply fill in the father's section of the birth certificate, the (alleged) father must do this and sign it himself. why can't a man who doubts his paternity just refuse to name himself (thus avoiding child-support payments??)
if only
even in some US states (most I believe) men who have found out they are not the biological father cant get the payments stopped as the courts have said that it would not be fair on the child to suddenly stop receiving the money and affect its lifestyle its used to.
absolute bollocks.
Lindsay,
I reckon you should check your facts then. When I had my child, I was not in a relationship with the father, and I had to send the birth certificate to him to get him to fill in his side. He wanted to do so, but could just as easily have refused. I was not entitled to merely write in his name-- this is not permissable in a legal document. I applied for the DPB at that point, and WINZ informed me that although they could start payments without the birth certificate, they suggested I hurry the father along for the IRD's sake, which I did. It is certainly not the case that the first acknowledgment a father (or alleged "father") will receive of his paternity is a child-support deduction from his pay. He would have had to acknowledge his paternity first, on the birth certificate. If he has not, and the mother insists it is he, then the case may go to the courts. And, yes, I agree this process is ridiculuously expensive, for both parties.
I should add that the IRD called me repeatedly long after I had sent a copy of my child's birth certificate, to ask of its whereabouts (they had lost it, it appears, surprise), because without evidence of paternity they could not collect child support...
http://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/wpg_URL/Services-Births-Deaths-and-Marriages-Births-Frequently-Asked-Questions?OpenDocument
Who needs to sign the birth registration form?
If the child's parents are legally married to each other, or in a civil union or de facto relationship with each other, either the mother or father can sign the birth registration form. If they are not legally married to each other, or in a civil union or de facto relationship with each other, the mother must sign the birth registration form, and if the fathers details are to be recorded he must also sign the birth registration form.
http://www.justice.govt.nz/family/what-familycourt-does/children/paternity.asp#fc2
here's your research.
what-familycourt-does/children/paternity.asp
sorry. it won't paste properly. above is the end of the link.
Thanks. As I said it's all a grey area to me. I am relying on the reported incidence of this happening.
"Who needs to sign the birth registration form?
If the child's parents are legally married to each other, or in a civil union or de facto relationship with each other, either the mother or father can sign the birth registration form. If they are not legally married to each other, or in a civil union or de facto relationship with each other, the mother must sign the birth registration form, and if the fathers details are to be recorded he must also sign the birth registration form."
I wonder what proof of a de facto relationship is required? Could he be named on the birth certificate without his knowledge?
The following is at http://menz.org.nz/
Information/flaws.htm
Major Flaw No 12 -Liable Parents Assumed 'Guilty'
"Under the Child Support Act, anyone named by an eligible custodian as the father of a child is automatically assumed to be liable. Thus it frequently happens that the first time a man knows he has been named as the father of a child is when he finds his salary has been deducted by the Child Support Agency. If the liable parent wishes to dispute the liability or seek a variation to the payments, then the burden falls onto the liable parent. The Child Support Act reverses what most people understand to be the cornerstone of our justice system, that "a citizen is innocent till proven guilty". Family law frequently assumes guilt in this way, reflecting how far New Zealand's family law has diverged from the principles that guide the rest of our law."
I'll see if I can get the author of this to give us some input.
No probs.
Yes, I wonder about the "de facto" status and evidence thereof also. This contradicts the info given on the ministry of justice site, and what i had believed, that only a married woman can fill in the form for her husband. And I'm afraid I am very suspicious of any info given on menz.org.nz, but let's see what they say. As I said, this was certainly not my experience (the IRD was insistent that they have a copy of my daughter's birth certificate before they made contact with the father. And on the birth registration form it clearly stated that as the father and I were not in a relationship (I actually think it said even a de facto relationship did not count) he needed to fill in and sign the form himself.
Post a Comment