Maybe a test to prove men are the father should be first step before ordering men to pay child support?
Time and again we hear someone who has paid tens of thousands is not the father,we could swap small country town jokes about the confusion fathers day brings them but if we truly want equality in all things why not give men some protection in an area they currently have few?
Currently men have buckley's chance of being repaid and not much more some times of even being able to spend time with the kids that are his.
'

There have been a number of cases where by DNA checks males were not the father but the courts made them pay child support anyway.
Something wrong with something.

yeah unfortunately women can be just as deceitful as men especially when it comes to prostituting themselves and money. Problem is the feminised court system does not reconize that simple fact.

Hey. Blokes who put it about and don't know which children are theirs and which are not are immoral scrotes. Let them worry about it.

My reason for this is men always have the odds stacked against them in the area of child custody,and much more often in this area, a poster has already said some men known not to be the father still suffer,this week a man who had paid for ten years, been threatened time and again by welfare people, proved he was not the father, not good enough! the mother,who had pressed these charges time and again said *it was a mistake*! I am on Social security and can not afford to pay it back! what is wrong with our whole family court system? surely in this and every area justice must be blind not subject to giving one sex a better outcome than the other?

There should be mandatory DNA tests done with every single birth in Australia. This should be the norm and paternity should be established at the time of birth.

Of course, this will never be allowed, because far too many women have sex outside the marriage/relationship and our feminist run society with all the white knights protecting them, won't allow it. Knowing the fact that women have full control over sex, it is a nonsense to suggest that men are the ones screwing around and women are being raped or forced into it.

It's time we stop this idiotic protecting of women who misbehave and play up. If they are screwing around, then their husband/partner has a right to know, especially if there is a child involved. Once he finds out the child is not his, then he has the opportunity to decide whether to support that child or not and whether he will stay with the adulterer he is living with.

People who play around on their spouses/partners are pretty immoral and are a blight on families, mostly children. The problem is, we have only ever pointed the finger at men who do this. It's time to point the finger at women!

Dear Belly,

I'm for mandatory DNA testing as well.
It seems only fair. And then if the father finds
out the child is not his but still wants to accept
the child and raise them as his own - that's up to
the bloke. But at least he'll be given the choice.
Anything less - is deceit - (not so pure and simple).

Pete6 Quote "There should be mandatory DNA tests done with every single birth in Australia"

I believe this is already being done and has for years.

But there is a difference between the dna being taken (blood sample) and having it actually processed.

Without the processing you have a sample and a who it came from.

@Phillip S. There is no DNA testing done in Australia for the purposes of Paternity testing. Under the current climate of feminist control, it will not be allowed.
I know they test the cord blood, but that is for different reasons.

Everything has it's Pro's and Con's.

My first thoughts:

Yeah I'd support it.
It's probably in the long term best interests of the kids.
It would automatically settle any thought of mistrust and give the father certainty, and I don't see why they don't deserve that.

They're supposed to care for the woman during her pregnency.
So often they've already put themselves out emotionally and financially for the child in question.
They deserve certainty without having to request it.

But then I thought... wait, hang on a minute.
Trojan Horse, almost got me.

This is to make sure every child has their DNA on record from birth.
That may not necessarily be a bad thing right now, but can it be misused in the future?

It's like another article I saw yesterday about installing cameras to catch people using mobile phones.

Now on face value it makes sense, but if you think about it, if you're a person who uses a phone illegally whilst driving, then your not going to do so when you go past a fixed camera.

You're only gonna get caught if your driving somewhere you don't normally go and you're not aware there's a camera there.

They always roll these things out for 'good' reasons, but there's always pro's and con's;
This is a transport control grid.

You wont be able to leave your house or go 200 meters down the road without facial recognition technology tracking everyone's movements.

There are too many people causing accidents using phones; but that time should soon pass as all new cars have bluetooth and handsfree; and gps.

- They can track where the cars going, they want to know who's in it.

Pete6 that test sample is there if they want to use it later to get the dna of people.

IF we wish to be honest the very fact I think such a thing is needed proves men too are the reason we need this, it is not possible for me to overlook dads get the short end of the stick in custody matters, that however seems to come as an over reaction to the truth, some men, not even near all, are not safe to have custody, surely simple justice however should exist for both sexes in all matters involving children, we know some women deliberately trap some men they know are not the father,we should see the same full on pursuit of men to pay for children mirrored in retrieving money wrongly paid

"...some men, not even near all, are not safe to have custody..."
That goes both ways.
"...some women deliberately trap some men they know are not the father..."
Some women deliberately trap some men to make them a father.

To sum up: keep in your pants, boys.

So the problem is men? nothing to see here we all know men put it about? well back to reality the problem is men who are not the father, not the father, being chased by mothers who sometimes know they are not the father, to comply with social welfare demands they name someone as dad, the problem is also, social welfare, that even gets court judgments against the not the father, sometimes even putting hold on bank accounts and wages, for a child that is not his, NOW if it was possible for a mum to be in that position would the court pursue her? come, DNA BY LAW for every child support case and make the stand over child support agency's return every dollar men wrongly paid, let them get it back if the can from the woman they commited a fraud for in the first place

Belly,

I have never mixed in the circles you obviously have, but I would have thought that these women wouldn't be accusing blokes they didn't know of fathering their children, and even that sort of women would not be daft enough to accuse any bloke who hadn't rogered them of putting them up the Duff. So I repeat, keep in in your pants and you won't be accused. This sort of stuff shouldn't be of concern to a bloke of your age anyway.

Some men have been paying for years, child care for children that are not theirs DNA proved this
Some women knew this all the time.
Some of these men have even had money taken out of their wages/personal bank accounts
Pursuit of these men by child support has often been traumatic.
When the truth is revealed women rarely pay back the man.
Fairness for both sexs is not a crime.
As can be seen by any one who is able to understand the parents of some children never bothered to wed

It's a hard issue. On the one hand, seeking protections on the limits of the justice system so to sort out the abuses is worth striving for. However there is another issue too. Like the point of an unintended consquence is to hold everyone's DNA data from their birth, one other unintended consquence is that mistakes happen in medical testing. If one test accidentally gets mixed up with another then there's no chance that the correct father will be identified. A mixed up test can cause a family to shatter with distrust and betrayal even if there was no betrayal to begin with.

Honestly the best advise has already been given, by ttbn. Keep it in your pants boys.

Not-Now.Soon yes true, however even worse if done other than for finding out who should pay it could break dads hearts and end real happy relationships, that may be the reason it doesn't already exist.
However,freedom to not have your DNA stored [not sure why you think like that] surely can not over rule the rights of *not the dad* who has paid for maybe decades,and maybe under great durese for children that are not his?
Consider The man who has moved on to a happy marriage with kids that are his, but has lead a lesser life because he was forced to pay for someone else's kids?

To Belly. I don't really care about our DNA being stored by givernment or anyone else. I only mentioned it because it was already brought up and can be used as an example of unintended consquences. I could be wrong here, but I would assume the number of medical tests getting wrong at birth, would be a very small number. Probabley compairable to the number of people who are accused of being the father and pay alimony, but aren't.

I wouldn't be opposed to needing a parental test before needing the father to pay alimony. But I don't think a parental test at birth is going to solve the problem as much as replacing the problem with another equally bad problem. If nothing else the test would need to be taken more then once to confirm the results, but, that's just another expense that likely isn't a concern to most people expecting a baby.

Either way though the better option I already agreed with. We need a change in culture. And encourage to not have sex as casually or as quickly as we do in relationships. For guys to keep it in their pants instead of finding out all of the issues that could come up if they don't. (This issue being one of those issues).

Not-Now.Soon I am biased on DNA last night watched my footy team win a true historic come back, too wide awake to sleep TV surfed between two true life murder docos, DNA helped solve them re-enforcing my long time view we have nothing to fear, yes, no defence, testing will bring great pain,but can it ever be fair not to test? to let not the dad/his true kids/his wife live a lessor life because he pays for someone else,if the kid next door steals a car, runs over a child, do we consider the crime? or how many others may be hurt?

This is a difficult one. If you looked after a non biological child and formed a relationship with that child and broke up with the child's parent you could request child custody under the current family law system, which is a good protection for people in that situation. See -

https://www.cudmorelegal.com.au/family-law-services/child-custody-lawyers-brisbane

The reason you could go for custody or rights to see the child is that the family courts have a broad description on what is considered a parent. So technically even if you do a DNA test and the child is not yours but you've cared for them, you still might be up for child support.

Family Lawyer my thanks and welcome, please consider staying around, yes your point is very true and lets face it we have fathers who are not dad but happy to stay around.
BUT been around construction work and workers most of my life,, once dads hid from child support under fake names in that field.
Quite rightly the laws have changed
But too some true victims are deliberately picked out to be not the dad, it is them I talk about.
Many times broken men have spoken to me about their wages being held to pay for someone else's child, most recently such a not the dad trying to get to see children he had supported for near twelve years,was told *they are not your kids* by the mum? thoughts?

//So technically even if you do a DNA test and the child is not yours but you've cared for them, you still might be up for child support.//

So basically, you're better off just avoiding kids altogether and keeping dogs instead. Less hassle, less noise, less mess, less expense and more fun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ-fvr2qLc0

Lot of pain in this area but once you hold your child in your arms many would not want to know it was never theirs
The child may not want change.
But your kids that are yours may not need to suffer because you foot the bills for another's child justice matters

Where would all this end though? If there are any doubts or queries about the paternity of your child, then DNA tests can be done. If you don’t want to have children or have this apparently rampant paternity issue as a worry, then just abstain from sex, or wear condoms at all times?

I don’t like any member of a supposedly loyal couple having destructive affairs, especially if it will mean that the paternity of any children born is in question. It isn’t fair on the children either.

I would imagine that if this were a really prolific problem then DNA testing would be made mandatory. Obviously, it is not though.

Suseonline well the most recent but far from only public case was a ten year not the dad who had a one night stand with the mum.
He paid and paid and his family, [he wed after that one nighter] suffered , he was even forced to make a multi thousand dollar bank withdrawal twice, he finally got the DNA test, but she can not repay him
the very same people who hunted him haunted him for the support are in charge of getting it back, and at best are not trying very hard.
Yes this area would kill relationships, so very many hearts would be broken, in fact it would be unwise for every child to be DNA tested.
It may well happen, we will be poorer for it.
But once a dad is ordered to pay support the first step must be proving he is the dad

Sexuality is an animal need. To say people need to control their sexuality just creates pressure. The limbic brain starts to dominate the neo-cortex. The Catholic church for hundreds of years encouraged the masses the outlet of marriage- gender based roles limited interaction of the genders- perhaps gently encouraging people to exercise restraint- in order to preserve stability in society.

Author- Napoleon Hill- discussed sexuality and it's role in motivation in life. Based on this perhaps it could be unrealistic to expect that sexuality can be removed from the work place and other parts of society. You can try to enforce this prohibition on sexuality in the workplace- but I expect that the only thing that is truly practical is to curb its extremes.

Male animals tend to be sexually dominant (often based on displays of strength and aggression) and so it tends to be easier to see male sexuality. The animal limbic brain is part of humans. Genders express their animal natures in different ways- we are not purely beings of logic- nor would many choose to be. Animals also tend to take different roles in animal society. Whether animal behavior can be related to humans is contentious- perhaps due to the political nature of society.

With this in mind labeling male sexual behavior as evil or illegal is perhaps a form of tyranny

One of the reasons for the conflict of identity politics perhaps is the "thought silos" between fields of study.

CM we dare not look under the sheets for comments in this thread, but know surrounding small villages are places not quite so quite.
One known as Paton Place, is not one teen ages should date locals in, another proudly proclaims fathers day there is total confusion.
single men even aged ones get the acid put on them constantly by wedded women,
Stay quite on that theme.
Yes humans, both sexes, act naturally, how however do you think that impacts on hundreds even thousands of not the dads?
What of the fella who is openly sent for a walk when a truck driver visit his wife, should he have the right to such a test?
I am not trying to control our sex habits, but trying resolve a very real legal problem, *why should not the dad suffer*

the very same people who hunted him haunted him for the support are in charge of getting it back,
Belly,
They then should be made to compensate him & it should be their problem how to get the funds.
Of course,that could only happen in a country that has real Justice.

Belly- Over all I agree with many of your points here. But my point is this issue perhaps needs to be taken in the context of "socially progressive" policy... such as the sexual revolution, female rights, role identity changes, etc, etc. If you allow/ encourage/ create more complexity in the community you are going to get more complex even intractable problems. I am arguing for "social conservatism".

Also male displays of dominance and strength can be perhaps diversionary to actual sex. Though I'm open to other schools of thought on this.

CM the eldest child of a very big family born post WW2 I have many siblings who have had many wives and long term partners, so see often both side wander, it is in our DNA
Too seen men gain custody of children only to see the little woman bolt with them and all not seen again.
JUSTICE in an area not always known for it is my aim, the man,show me if I am wrong, often gets beaten in matters of custody
If DNA has negative so too does the current system

Belly said- "Justice in an area not always known for it is my aim, the man,show me if I am wrong, often gets beaten in matters of custody
If DNA has negative so too does the current system"

Answer- I tend to agree. I'm sure everyone has personally seen the Family "Justice" System results. I'm sorry that it has affected you too. There are contentious policies that could be implemented to reduce the prevalence of these types of dilemma.

CM agree, and it is my view, painful as it will be for some, when the claim for support go,s in the DNA test should be law before a cent is taken out, any solution will be painful the best we can hope for is fairness

It might be kinder to test every child at birth, before they have formed an attachment to their putative father. Having their parents separate is hard enough for children, without suddenly being told that their father isn't their real father.

benk, let us not put every dad in the angry bad dad basket, some truly are victims.
And if done your way needless solid relationships will fall apart.
Some men may ever murder the wife.
white ribbon pledge taker I look only for justice, once dads did a bunk so not to pay, a grubby thing to do.
Now equally grubby some are victimized by the court and the woman, in the name of children that are not his