Posted on 03/29/2008 8:43:32 PM PDT by neverdem
I see this test being used a whole lot more by suspicious fathers than by pigs who want to know who to go after for child support. Anyway, it won’t be long before “Identigene-related murder” enters the weekly lexicon.
I dont know a lot about dna testing. Hence I ask here. I thought the mother, infant and father in question were to be tested...Again, any links I can read about this??
Fine if you’re in the Big Apple, but a little harder for folks in, say Syracuse or deep in the Adirondaks.
To get a 99% certain outcome, the test will have to look at sites not on the sex chromosomes, so one needs the mother’s DNA to see which half of the child’s DNA to match to the potential fathers’.
Such crimes could be chalked up to “crime of passion” defense. Even if the adultry/cheating were a decade(s) prior.
I'm not sure how well the test would work for that purpose. You would think that if the woman asks her husband or "significant other" to open wide so she could run this big Q-Tip around on the inside of his cheek, he just might suspect something fishy was going on.
DNA testing companies in NY must have paid a pretty penny to buy this legislation.
Feminist lobby?
She has to use her imagination for getting that sample from her husband. Maybe other than cheek tissue can be used
You guys and your comments are HYSTERICAL!
The Family Court industry and friends of destroying fathers don’t want to lose profit. What is the cost(DNA test) via the court?
$300.00, $500.00+?
Maybe this will change the old saying, “mama’s baby, daddy’s maybe”.
AND THERE HE HO'S AGAIN (Eliot Spitzer)
Indirectly, I was pinged to that story, then I stumbled into the paternity test. BTW, between Spitzer, Paterson, Hillary and Obama and all that they recently did, the prospects for the GOP in NY this November might not be as bad as expected.
FReepmail me if you want on or off my New York ping list.
P.S. Don't go to the NY Post homepage now. There was another story about Spitzer's legal jeopardy, but the NY Post homepage just keeps bombing out and closes most windows.
“...Los Angeles County fails abysmally at ensuring that only men who fathered a child may be required to pay that child’s support. In 2000 alone, more than 79 percent of the county’s paternity judgments were assigned by default, meaning that the suspected father never had his day in court.
Many of the men assigned default judgments for child support never received summonses to appear in court. Because of the prevalence of default judgments, men who have not fathered a child can turn into “dads” instantly when the court enters a default judgment.
Once applied, that label is difficult, if not impossible, to remove. State agencies and district attorneys frequently fight such appeals, challenging anyone who fails to respond to a court summons — even one served to a “last-known” address. This aggressive pursuit of assigning paternity at any cost has ensnared thousands of innocent men mistakenly identified as having fathered children who do not belong to them.
The prevalence of paternity fraud has reached startling proportions. As many as 28 to 30 percent of men tested for paternity learn they are not biologically related to the children they allegedly fathered, according to the American Association of Blood Banks.
The high incidence of default paternity judgments can be tied to economic motives: More than 11 million fathers do not live with their children. Nationwide, child-support collections have grown to more than $18 billion annually. State legislatures long have sought to offset the financial drain of welfare payments made to single mothers by identifying biological fathers who do not live with their children.
State child-support agencies receive federal reimbursements of two-thirds of their administrative budgets, in addition to incentives of 6 to 10 percent for each dollar of child support collected. Under federal guidelines, states must identify the fathers of children whose mothers are receiving welfare benefits or risk losing incentive monies. Federal guidelines also encourage aggressive collection efforts by allowing states to retain the cost of welfare benefits from child-support payments made by the noncustodial parent. Because federal rules do not require DNA testing to prove paternity, states have no incentive to investigate claims of fraud and every reason to fight efforts to disestablish paternity...”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_19_18/ai_87024959
$18 Billion
This industry is what is destroying America.
When I saw this yesterday I was a bit conflicted...for the sake of children, I don’t know if this is a good idea, although it was inevitable...and I think you’re right..the “unsure father” market will definitely be larger than the “unsure mother.” The question of the ages can be answered for under 40 bucks.
Gov Patterson can rest easier.
“The Family Court industry and friends of destroying fathers don’t want to lose profit. What is the cost(DNA test) via the court?”
Bingo, follow the money in situations like this.
Spritzer probably hand a hand or something in this.
It’s about the money, and destroying Genesis.
What is happening here(looking at the bigger picture) is the same as the NAZI of the 30’s and 40’s...
Check out bottom of this old(1999 Article)...
Money, use the childrens as cover to get money. These demons(not all-but most) don’t care about childrens,family, and God.
I was made aware of this article by ANCPR, Alliance for Non-Custodial Parents Rights. I urge you to contact them in order to receive an information packet that further substantiates the destructive effect of the draconian child support enforcement laws that have been enacted in recent years. Their address is:
ANCPR http://ancpr.org
From Insight Magazine
Vol. 15, No. 28 — August 2, 1999
Published Date July 9, 1999, in Washington, D.C. www.insightmag.com
Q: Is court-ordered child support doing more harm than good?
Yes: This engine of the divorce industry is destroying families and the Constitution.
By Stephen Baskerville
. . . . Geoff came home one day to find a note on the kitchen table saying his wife had taken their two children to live with their grandparents. He quit his job as head of his department in a university and followed. He was summoned to court on eight-hours’ notice and, without a lawyer and without being permitted to speak, was stripped of custody rights and ordered to stay away from his wife and children most of the time. Because he had no job, no car and no place to live, his mother cancelled a pending sale of her house, and he moved in with her. Geoff and his mother now pay about $1,200 a month to his wife and her wealthy parents, and he is left to live and care for his two children on about $700 a month. A judge also threatened him with jail if he did not pay a lawyer he had not hired. When his temporary job ends, the payments must continue, and he is not permitted to care for the children while unemployed. He also expects to be coerced into paying more legal fees. He has never been charged with any wrongdoing, either criminal or civil.
. . . . Geoff’s experience increasingly is common. In fact, it is epidemic. Massive numbers of fathers who are accused of no wrongdoing now are separated from their children, plundered for everything they have, publicly vilified and incarcerated without trial.
. . . . About 24 million American children live in homes where the father is not present, with devastating consequences for both the children and society. Crime, drug and alcohol abuse, truancy, teenage pregnancy, suicide and psychological disorders are a few of the tragic consequences. Conventional wisdom assumes that the fathers of these children have abandoned them. In this case the conventional wisdom is dangerously wrong. It is far more likely that an “absent” father is forced away rather than leaving voluntarily.
. . . . In his new study, Divorced Dads: Shattering the Myths, Sanford Braver of Arizona State University has shown conclusively that the so-called “deadbeat dad,” one who deserts his children and evades child support, “does not exist in significant numbers.” Braver confirms that, contrary to popular belief, at least two-thirds of divorces are filed by mothers, who have virtual certainty of getting the children and a huge portion of the fathers’ income, regardless of any fault on their part. The title of Ashton Applewhite’s 1997 book says it succinctly: Cutting Loose: Why Women Who End Their Marriages Do So Well.
. . . . Other studies have found even higher percentages of divorces filed by mothers, and lawyers report that, when children are involved, divorce is the initiative of the mother in virtually all instances. Moreover, few of these divorces involve grounds such as desertion, adultery or violence. The most frequent reasons given are “growing apart” or “not feeling loved or appreciated.” (Surveys consistently show that fathers are much more likely than mothers to believe parents should remain married.) Yet, as Braver reports, despite this involuntary loss of their children, 90 percent of these deserted fathers regularly pay court-ordered child support (unemployment being the main reason for nonpayment), often at exorbitant levels and many without any rights to see their children. Most make heroic efforts to stay in contact with the children from whom they are forcibly separated.
. . . . The plight of unmarried inner-city fathers is harder to quantify, but there is no reason to assume they love their children any less. A recent study conducted in Washington with low-income fathers ages 16 to 25 found that 63 percent had only one child; 82 percent had children by only one mother; 50 percent had been in a serious relationship with the mother at the time of pregnancy; only 3 percent knew the mother of their child only a little; 75 percent visited their child in the hospital; 70 percent saw their children at least once a week; 50 percent took their child to the doctor; large percentages reported bathing, feeding, dressing and playing with their children; and 85 percent provided informal child support in the form of cash or purchased goods such as diapers, clothing and toys. University of Texas anthropologist Laura Lein and Rutgers University professor Kathryn Edin recently found that low-income fathers often are far worse off than their government-assisted families, “but economically and emotionally marginal as many of these fathers are, they still represent a large proportion of low-income fathers who continue to make contributions to their children’s households and to maintain at least some level of relationship with those children.”
. . . . Yet the voices of these fathers rarely are heard in the public arena. Instead we hear the imprecations of a government conducting what may be the most massive witch-hunt in this country’s history. Never before have we seen the spectacle of the highest officials in the land — including the president, the attorney general and other Cabinet secretaries, and leading members of Congress from both parties — using their offices as platforms from which publicly to vilify private citizens who have been convicted of nothing and who have no opportunity to reply.
. . . . Under the guise of pursuing deadbeat dads, we now are seeing mass incarcerations without trial, without charge and without counsel, while the media and civil libertarians look the other way. We also have government officials freely entering the homes and raiding the bank accounts of citizens who are accused of nothing and simply helping themselves to whatever they want — including their children, their life savings and their private papers and effects, all with hardly a word of protest noted.
. . . . And these are fathers who are accused of nothing. Those who face trumped-up accusations of child abuse also must prove their innocence before they can hope to see their children. Yet now it is well established that most child abuse takes place in the homes of single mothers. A recent study from the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, found that “almost two-thirds [of child abusers] were females.” Given that male perpetrators are not necessarily fathers but much more likely to be boyfriends and stepfathers, fathers emerge as the least likely child abusers. A British study by Robert Whelan in 1993 titled Broken Homes and Battered Children concluded that a child living with a single mother is up to 33 times more likely to be abused than a child living in an intact family. The argument of many men legally separated from their families is that the real abusers have thrown the father out of the family so they can abuse his children with impunity.
. . . . In Virginia alone the state Division of Child Support Enforcement now is “pursuing” 428,000 parents for up to $1.6 billion, according to its director, Nick Young. In a state of fewer than 7 million people, the parents of 552,000 children are being “pursued.” That is the parents of roughly half the state’s minor dependent children. HHS claims that almost 20 million fathers in the nation are being pursued for something close to $50 billion. We are being asked to believe that half the fathers in America have abandoned their children willfully.
. . . . These figures essentially are meaningless. If they indicate anything it is the scale on which families are being taken over by a destructive and dangerous machine consisting of judges, lawyers, psychotherapists, social workers, bureaucrats and women’s groups — all of whom have a direct financial interest in separating as many children from their fathers as possible, vilifying and plundering the fathers and turning them into criminals. The machine is so riddled with conflicts of interest that it is little less than a system of organized crime. Here is how it works: Judges are appointed and promoted by the lawyers and “custody evaluators,” into whose pockets they funnel fees; the judges also are influenced with payments of federal funds from child-support enforcement bureaucracies that depend on a constant supply of ejected fathers; child-support guidelines are written by the bureaucracies that enforce them and by private collection companies that have a financial stake in creating as many arrearages and “deadbeat dads” as possible. These guidelines are then enacted by legislators, some of whom divert the enforcement contracts to their own firms, sometimes even taking personal kickbacks (as charged in a recent federal indictment in Arkansas). Legislators who control judicial appointments also get contracts (and kickbacks, again the case in Arkansas) for providing legal services at government expense in the courts of their appointees. And, of course, custody decisions and child-support awards must be generous enough to entice more mothers to take the children and run, thus bringing a fresh supply of fathers into the system. In short, child support is the financial fuel of the divorce industry. It has very little to do with the needs of children and everything to do with the power and profit of large numbers of adults.
. . . . For their part, politicians can register their concern for fatherless children relatively cheaply by endlessly (and futilely) stepping up “child-support” collection while creating programs ostensibly designed to “reunite” fathers with their children. Even some fatherhood advocates jump on the bandwagon, attacking “absent” fathers while holding their tongues about the judicial kidnapping of their children. Though almost everyone now acknowledges the importance of fathers, for too many there are more political and financial rewards in targeting them as scapegoats than in the more costly task of upholding the constitutional rights of fathers and their children not to be ripped apart.
. . . . There is no evidence that endless “crackdowns” on evicted fathers serve any purpose other than enriching those in the cracking-down business. With child- support enforcement now a $3 billion national industry, the pursuit of the elusive deadbeat yields substantial profits, mostly at public expense. “In Florida last year,” writes Kathleen Parker in the Orlando Sentinel, “taxpayers paid $4.5 million for the state to collect $162,000 from fathers”; and the story is the same elsewhere.
. . . . Instead of the easy fiction that massive numbers of fathers are suddenly and inexplicably abandoning their children, perhaps what we should believe instead is that a lucrative racket now is cynically using our children as weapons and tools to enrich lawyers and provide employment for judges and bureaucrats. Rather than pursuing ever greater numbers of fathers with ever more Draconian punishments, the Justice Department should be investigating the kind of crimes it was created to pursue — such as kidnapping, extortion and racketeering — in the nation’s family courts.
Sincerely,
That $4.5 Million can be used for health care programs for the poor, but these criminals stole it.
but hey...we recovered $162,000.
You see , why Social Security is broke. Stolen
These over the counter DNA tests are really for guys, who have a suspicion that the baby/babies/child/children, teen agers may not be from his gene pool.
Assume that in your family: No one is blond, blue eyed and with a fair complexion. Also no males in your family have never been taller that 5’ 10” and never weighed more than 165#.
Now assume that your wife has presented you with three sons, who are blond, blue eyed and with a fair complexion. At age 10 they could play professional basketball due to their height or pro football due to their height and weight.
Also, as teenagers, they may have behavioral problems like alcoholism, drug abuse and problems with the police. None of these problems have ever happened in your family. So you decide to do a DNA tests on the teenagers in your family to see if they are your sons or the sons of satan.
So you buy 4 tests, one for each probable bastard son and one for you. You do the swab thing with each probable bastard son and on you. You send in the tests.
They come back that all 3 so called sons are related to each other and not you. They are real SOBs, sons of Satan!
A lot of unhappy marriages will be heading to the divorce courts with the not a daddy for the kids getting a divorce with no child support or spousal support. These tests aren’t legal, but legal tests will be waiting for the guys with money.
Now with these tests available, you don’t have to wait years. If you have suspicions, you can run the test on the new born asap and see if he, she, it are part of your gene pool.
These tests will do the dna idents on both male and female children.
One family lawyer, we know said that a lot of estates and wills may be modified even with adult children having to prove DNA identity to be included in the will. Refusal to submit to a DNA test might get them a $ in the will and nothing else. He is telling guys, who are suspicious about the DNA of their so called children, to buy the tests and get the results. If they show a problem, he will then help them get official tests run. He estimates about 10% of the births in California have another real father besides the poor sucker listed on the marriage and birth certificates.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.