ALARMINGNEWS_1_1.jpg

August 11, 2005

'18 years. 18 years. And on the 18th birthday he found out it wasn't his.'

One in 25 fathers is not biological parent - study

It's in the Guardian and it doesn't say if this is just Britain, world-wide, or what. I've been asked why it is that Jewishness is passed on through the mother, as opposed to Christianity that goes by the father. Well, you'll always know who the kid's mom is.

Posted by Karol at August 11, 2005 12:05 PM | TrackBack
Technorati Tags:
Comments

This report says it was based on studies from the U.S., Finland, New Zealand, South Africa, and Mexico.

All new dads should request a paternity test. As discreetly as possible, of course.

Posted by: Allah at August 11, 2005 12:17 PM

I feel about paternity tests like I feel about pre-nups. There is nothing wrong with either. It removes all doubt, and that's a good thing in a marriage.

Posted by: Karol at August 11, 2005 12:26 PM

Karol, you're such a romantic.

Posted by: Jay at August 11, 2005 12:32 PM

"I've been asked why it is that Jewishness is passed on through the mother, as opposed to Christianity that goes by the father. Well, you'll always know who the kid's mom is."

Are we born into the faith through our fathers ? Send a memo to the pope and tell him that whole baptism thing needs to be called off.

Posted by: Von Bek at August 11, 2005 12:51 PM

Well, faith in either case is something that you develop on your own, on a personal level. But I've always understood that in Christianity your faith is based on your father's faith while in Judaism you're considered a Jew if your mother is one.

Posted by: Karol at August 11, 2005 01:13 PM

Karol, you're such a romantic.

Well, is it any more romantic to have someone marry for money or trick someone into raising a kid that is not theirs? I'm a big fan of certainty.

Posted by: Karol at August 11, 2005 01:15 PM

Although unpopular (and a result of being home after September 11th for several months with no job to go to, watching daytime TV), I think it should be a law that every child born in this country should require a paternity test. It should not be optional, it should be mandatory, removing the awkwardness from the situation for the father.

The law says, once you sign the birth certificate as the father, you're stuck, even if you're not the biological father. You can divorce once you find out later on, but you have to still pay child support if you signed that damned piece of paper.

It doesn't cost much, so we should make it a law.

Posted by: Sean at August 11, 2005 01:15 PM

Ugh. As much as I hate gov't intervention, I agree with Sean. Supporting another man's baby isn't high on many men's 'to do' lists.

Posted by: Jay at August 11, 2005 01:58 PM

Kids are over rated any way. Aint no miracle there, most any 2 opposite sex people can do it, and with all the "children are our future" crap i have heard in my life, I have seen as many kids grow up to be and endless drain on their patience and pocket book as productive members of society. That is just a bad investment and you cant even cut your losses. people will "do what it takes" to pop out kids no matter what anyone says or does'nt say. I think at 16 you are not showing potential....straight to a work camp(unless someone is willing to sponsor you). And ofcourse beating your children should be mandatory, instead of child support there should only be a penalty for not beating your children enough. If your kid acts up and u r not around to beat them, you should get a ticket and your child will still be beaten, but not by u(that's right u will have to wait your turn).

Posted by: Pheeleepok at August 11, 2005 02:31 PM

Didn't you guys see the Discover Channel documentary about the people with TWO different DNA sets in their body ... in which a woman, after state officials WATCHED her give birth to a child, tested NEGATIVE in a DNA test. Something about when in the womb, there are twin fertilized eggs, but the the bigger one completely gobbles up the other one (but there's no remaining lump of hair or anything, just the DNA).

Anyway, otherwise, what Sean said.

Posted by: ken at August 11, 2005 03:26 PM

Actually, in some states (though perhaps this has changed recently), if you are married to the woman at the time of the birth, you are the legal father, with all rights and responsibilities.

This happened to a friend of my husband's. Turns out neither child was biologically his. However, he was married to the woman, and had brought up the kids as his own for at least 12 years before finding out the truth and getting divorced.

There's a very good reason for this kind of law. If you have acted as the parent, especially for a good hunk of the kids' lives, you have the responsibility to see it through. You can't be a father for 12 years, and then say "Hey, you don't have my DNA, so I'm not going to have anything to do with you anymore."

As for the religion thing -- I've never heard of that rule for Christianity. Perhaps it is true in Europe, but generally in the U.S. whichever parent is more religious will tend to dictate which religion the kids will go into (if the parents haven't agreed to something ahead of time). And generally, in the U.S., it's the mothers who are more religious. It's difficult to go by my extended family, as the men who married Catholics (and the kids were brought up Catholic) converted to Catholicism after a number of years of marriage.

Posted by: meep at August 11, 2005 03:54 PM

Addendum: although Jewishness is determined through the mother (precisely because, as K noted, you always know who she is, at least at the moment of birth), the tribe of Jewish babies (Cohen, Levite, or Israelite) is determined by the father. This encouraged intramarriage, so that the baby in question would be twice tied to the faith.

Posted by: Esther at August 11, 2005 04:16 PM

"There's a very good reason for this kind of law. If you have acted as the parent, especially for a good hunk of the kids' lives, you have the responsibility to see it through. You can't be a father for 12 years, and then say "Hey, you don't have my DNA, so I'm not going to have anything to do with you anymore.""

what a load of nonsense. why should anyone be obligated against his will to continue sponsoring someone who he has no real ties to?

how about the actual father be liable for reimbursing the value of child care to the cuckold?

Posted by: mike d at August 11, 2005 04:39 PM

What is a tribe of Jewish babies?

Posted by: PAUL at August 12, 2005 08:49 AM

Von Bek, I'm afraid I don't understand your question about being born into faith by our fathers.

Esther, I don't understand what you mean by a tribe of Jewish babies.

Posted by: Zelda at August 12, 2005 02:28 PM

All new dads should request a paternity test. As discreetly as possible, of course.

If I had given birth to my husband's baby and found out he requested a paternity test, it would be the *only* off-spring he ever sires.

Posted by: ll at August 17, 2005 12:34 PM

I think it should be a law that every child born in this country should require a paternity test. It should not be optional, it should be mandatory, removing the awkwardness from the situation for the father.

Then turn about is fair play. I want every husband to account for *every* sperm he ever produces.

Posted by: ll at August 17, 2005 12:37 PM

If you can't find and fall in love with someone who won't cheat and lie to you, there is something wrong with you. If you are the type of person who cheats and lies to their spouse, there is something even more wrong with you.

Posted by: ll at August 17, 2005 12:40 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?