I guess I should've clarified as Paternity testing. Gattaca-esque DNA testing is something else altogether. You should have that right to privacy. I'll stand on the line to defend against that one.

Back to the topic.

Fractelle ~ I don't see how it could be used by controlling partners against their partner. I just don't. I guess it's the same argument that many have with the government gaining access to your personal information. If you have nothing to hide, then what's the issue?. I think both parents have equal right to know everything about their child. The mother shouldn't have ultimate control over both individuals claim on information regarding their child's paternity, etc. But, neither should the father.

Your father-wombat comment is retarded and unnecessary. They didn't force themselves on the women.

I guess it's a similar sort of thing to 'prenups' when raising it with your partner. The paternity test is about self preservation, and for the benefit of all people involved. I'd want to know if a child isn't mine before I invested my life in it. I'd find NOTHING more hurtful or betraying than finding out later it isn't mine.

Actually StG, the Gattaca-esque testing is not something else altogether. It will be routine, and at birth, as I can easily envisage benefits for SIDS and a whole range of life threatening diseases that affect babies. Paternity is just one of the effects from this kind of testing.

Arguing about paternity testing in the face of these technologies is like saying that orbital satellites are all very good and all and I recognise that they may have benefits to telecommunincations and navigation, but should we really be using them for predicting what the weather is tomorrow?

I wouldn't be doing the Test AT birth.
Surely it would be done in the womb, and the earlier the better.
Surely the mother would want the real father at the birth.
Surely the father wouldn't want to go through the emotional and economic ups and downs for months after the birth to find out the child is not his.
As mentioned earlier the DNA testing could be used for medical intervention as well.

Compulsory DNA testing at birth?

It would help to ease the current
situation where the statistics tell us that
over 20% of men currently paying child-support,
are doing it for someone else's child, not their
own. DNA would help ascertain the correct parentage.
And being compulsory - would become acceptable in time,
as a matter of course.

It would also give a more accurate family history and
aid in hereditary illness research.

more complications being caused by secular values. It is amazing how many problems are caused by these values or lack of them and then millions of dollars needed to address them.

Foxy, "It would help to ease the current situation where the statistics tell us that over 20% of men currently paying child-support, are doing it for someone else's child, not their
own."

I've not followed this closely but the reports I've seen have put the figure at about 25% where a paternity test is conducted. Most men paying child support don't have one done and it seems reasonable to assume that most paternity tests are conducted because the nominated father is concerned that they may not be the father. I don't think it's reasonable to extrapolate beyond that.

I've seen a range of figures for estimates of the percentage of children where the nominated father is not the biological father (and does not know it). My recollection is that most put the figure between 1 in 10 and 1 in 20 but I could be way off on that and I don't know the agenda's of those producing the figures.

R0bert