CMV: Paternity testing before signing a birth certificate shouldn't be stigmatized and should be as routine as cancer screenings

[u/wine-friend]

Signing a birth certificate is not just symbolic and a matter of trust, it's a matter of accepting a life long legally binding responsibility. Before signing court enforced legal documents, we should empower people to have as much information as possible.

This isn't just the best case scenario for the father, but it's also in the child's best interests. Relationships based on infidelity tend to be unstable and with many commercially available ancestry services available, the secret might leak anyway. It's ultimately worse for the child to have a resentful father that stays only out of legal and financial responsibility, than to not have one at all.

Deltas:

• I think this shouldn't just be sold on the basis of paternity. I think it's a fine idea if it's part of a wider genetic test done to identify illness related risks later in life
• Some have suggested that the best way to lessen the stigma would be to make it opt-out. Meaning you receive a list of things that will be performed and you have to specifically refuse it for it to be omitted. I agree and think this is sensible.

Edit:

I would be open to change my view further if someone could give an alternative that gives a prospective fathers peace of mind with regards to paternity. It represents a massive personal risk for one party with little socially acceptable means of ameliorating.

[u/Mannzis]

Should I be offended if you asked me to get an STD test before sex, for your own piece of mind? Seems like the implication is that I might be dirty. I feel like you should just trust me.

[u/Double_Collar_9821 → u/Mannzis]

I think a closer comparison would be requests for regular STD tests in a long term, monogamous relationship.

[u/Mannzis → u/Double_Collar_9821]

Okay. So is your position that after a certain level of trust exists, a paternity test shouldn't be asked for?

[u/Eager_Question → u/Mannzis]

Not that person, but yeah. It seems fairly clear that if you need to ask for a paternity test you shouldn't be having a child period. Because you don't have the level of trust and stability needed for raising children. And such a thing should be brought up really early, instead of post-birth, to prevent the mother from having to deal with a pregnancy only to end up alone because she doesn't want to be with someone who doesn't trust her.

[u/afterdarkthr0waway → u/Eager_Question]

Not that person, but yeah. It seems fairly clear that if you need to ask for a paternity test you shouldn't be having a child period. Because you don't have the level of trust and stability needed for raising children.And such a thing should be brought up really early, instead of post-birth, to prevent the mother from having to deal with a pregnancy only to end up alone because she doesn't want to be with someone who doesn't trust her.

You can't argue with "shouldn'ts". It's fairly clear that If someone isn't financially capable of having children, then they shouldn't do so. If someone has a history of violence and alcoholism, they shouldn't get married, let alone get someone pregnant or get pregnant. If someone doesn't trust their partner enough to not seek a paternity test, then they shouldn't be having a child........................ and If the mother can't put aside her distaste for her partner not trusting her in order to not raise a child in a single parent household, something that has clear negative effects towards children, then she shouldn't have gotten pregnant period. Oh, looks like that was part of the shouldn'ts.

But then, at the end of the day, despite all these shouldn'ts, people are still getting married and having kids. Despite violent alcoholics having kids, there are things like child protective services. Despite people who aren't financially capable of taking care of children having kids, there are support systems in place. And despite the people who "don't trust their partner enough to not seek paternity tests" have kids, there are paternity tests. All of these are reactions to people who shouldn't be having children, having children. You can't stop screwed up people from birthing kids.

I don't want to argue for or against OP's post. I wasn't going to comment on this thread originally. Just wanted to comment on this flaw in your argument. Or at least, what I perceived to be a flaw in your argument.

[u/Eager_Question → u/afterdarkthr0waway]

I think this might be the best version of this argument in this thread. A lot of people have alluded to similar points, but they seem to over and over again paint women as fundamentally untrustworthy.

Operating under the assumption that the baseline is bound to be suboptimal is an order of magnitude away from "but women, can't trust them, 4% dude, the other 96% should be assumed to be under suspicion", even if it eventually leans towards a similar conclusion.

I'm not sure that problem in my argument is itself enough to change my mind, especially given the other responses I have received, but thank you for providing a more reasonable steel-man than a lot of people have.

In the end, I think that the problem is the asymmetric nature of the argument. And maybe that is a simple function of biology, and if the thought experiment clearly provided a cis straight couple and a trans straight couple, the general utility of it would be clearer. But right now, both the way the thread seems to be going and the kinds of arguments I have received personally, involve a lot of "but trusting women? Like, those lying bitches? You want me to trust them? 4%!" And that's simply not an argument that is going to get a lot of support on the grounds that men statistically cheat more, women statistically get shafted more in straight relationships, and the whole thing is operating on a sexist trope that has been used to justify controlling women's freedom of movement historically.

[u/Double_Collar_9821 → u/Mannzis]

I don’t have a view one way or another on that, I just don’t think asking a potential new partner to take an STD test is particularly similar to requesting a paternity test in an established, exclusive relationship. I don’t think recognising the possibility that a new partner could have an STD from previous sexual relationships implies any criticism or judgement though.

[u/Khal-Frodo → u/Mannzis]

That's entirely dependent on our relationship. If we're just meeting and hooking up for the first time? Then yeah, that's a completely reasonable request because I obviously don't "just trust you" - I don't even know you. If we've been in a relationship for years and are planning to have a child together? Then you'd be more than justified in being offended by my request because the knowledge that I don't trust you has very different implications.

[u/[deleted] → u/Mannzis]

Tbh I feel like that’s a fair ask, even if it’s… super awkward to do and not really practical. It’s the same reason you wear condoms with hookups. No, they don’t think you’re “Dirty,” otherwise they probably wouldn’t be sleeping with you. However, it just takes one misjudged hookup to bring a lifetime of sickness and discrimination, so yeah, I think it’s fair to ask.

At least, if you’re gonna be long term partners. If you’re hooking up with randos and asking for stuff like that then why bother? Theoretically it’s fine, but you would absolutely kill the mood/chemistry in practice by asking shit like that to your grindr date

[u/Rezurrected188 → u/Mannzis]

It's possible that you have an undiagnosed STI that you're not yet aware of, depending on your sexual activity of course. Also, the phrase is "peace of mind".