To think all babies should be DNA tested at birth

[ohagape]

After reading that awful thread in step parenting where the poor guy wasn't even his 'sons' father and handed loads of money over to the horrible sounding mother, I really think all babies should be DNA tested as soon as they are born with the potential father/s, whether from a good relationship or not.

It would save a lot of heartbreak and wasted time and money. It can easily be told by blood types. My whole life my mum told me I had a different blood type. Then when I found out at my booking bloods and told her she got really confused about my dad's blood type. I really thought my dad wasn't my dad so he went and did a DNA test to reassure me. AIBU to think this should be a routine thing at all births and father's name shouldn't be on the birth certificate until it's done?

@Moving On: From memory, it is if the woman is 0 and the man is anything else. Yes, it is rather rare. But the money would at least serve an actual medical purpose, unlike what the OP suggested, which is just about male ego.
(I think I will pay to get my blood type tested if/when I plan to become pregnant. Just safer that way.)

I don't think that's right at all VestalVirgin.

Most common blood type is O so what you suggest would be an issue for most of the population.

NHS currently screens mothers for rhesus factor because that can be a problem as I previously mention with blue babies.

"I am O negative. I know that my mother is A. My dad by default must be O.

I could be either A or O, but the O type isn't always recessive. Same on the rhesus factor. If one parent is negative and one positive, then a resulting child could be either."

goodnessgracious, I don't think you understand genetics here. Each parent gives you one version of a gene, called an allele, so you have two of each. O is always recessive to A or B. (A and B are equal, which is why people can have AB blood.)

Your mother is either AA or AO to have blood group A.

Given that you have blood group OO (as O is recessive and if you had an A antigen, you'd have blood type A, so your mother must have AO in terms of the genetics), your dad has either blood type A (AO), B (BO), or O (OO). You've got an O antigen from both sides, giving you type O blood.

It is the same with the Rhesus allele. Your mother might be A+ (with +/- so with one negative allele to 'give away') or A- (-/-). The same with your father. All that you being Rhesus negative shows is both of your parents must have given you a negative Rhesus allele, whether they are both positive or one is positive and one is negative.

There is a nice explanation here: www.transfusion.com.au/blood_basics/blood_groups/inheritance_patterns

My blood type is O+. My husband (and he really is the father of all of our children) is A+. Therefore, depending on the alleles we have and have passed on, our children could be A+, A-, O+ or O-. (And if they are not, well, they must have been swapped at birth and that explains their naughty behaviour! )

The "I know who the father of my child is" pp's, I think it's blatantly obvious that it's not for your benefit, and those that lie to men probably also knew who the father was.

Perhaps not compulsory but maybe anonymous opt in but that wouldn't be very ethical.

With the divorce rate what it is and culturally people seems to be having more partners it seems like the start of an idea.

Also it could be medically significant for transfusions or risk of certain diseases

Sorry, when i asked about twins i meant if there were compulsory testing, not what happens when there is a jeremy kyle situation atm - i know twins are genetically identical. So the not knowing who it was would occur a lot more frequently than it actually does now, and in such a world where every baby was tested to ensure paternity, what would they do? Iyswim?

"o type isnt always recessive" paraphrase about resulting child not neccessarily being the dominant type
Umm, i think you are misinterpreting what a heterogenous recessive gene means and what the outcome can be?

*doles

'Also it could be medically significant for transfusions or risk of certain diseases'

For transfusions? They need your blood type, for the most part.

And certain diseases, if you present with a need for DNA testing in that respect then you will be offered one.

Our daughter had a rare form of leukaemia and required an allogenic stem cell transplant. DH, our two other children and I all got extensive DNA/genetic testing on the NHS to see if we were suitable matches (we were not).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rh_disease

It's actually Rh negative. I must somehow have confused that with 0 because zero is almost negative?

Anyway, there'd be a medical purpose to testing it before pregnancy. After, not so much.

@CandyCane: What are you talking about, exactly? Medical history, or what?
I think that will soon be unnecessary as we'll be able to find out whether there's increased risk by testing the person's own genes.

sometimes peoples lie for a reason though.

laid up fter a birth or having just had a c section and a tiny baby who may even need to remain in hospital fir a bit is NOT the time for abusive partners to find out its not their baby. or for a mum.to find out the man.who raped them.is the biological father

or for a woman who's spent months in hiding to be terrified the father will find out the baby has been born and come. looming for them.

sure some are lying bitches who put the "best option" down on paper. however maybe just maybe some are living a life where they are in danger or traumatised or being shunned by family and this information could have dramatic consequences for something that may well not be their fault.

I'm some countries women have no power over the children they go to the ken. imagine if the "dad" no matter how abusive or dangerous could be granted custody and she will never see the children again.

how's that help anyone

Paternity testing looks at areas of dna that don't code for anything. Good for identity, bugger all use for diagnosing medical conditions etc

Expat,

I mean you go to the doctors for whatever reason and they ask you your family history of certain cancers, heart issues etc

And that can (presumably ) help them estimate the risk or impact of procedures or tests etc.

But I hope your daughter is ok

(I think I will pay to get my blood type tested if/when I plan to become pregnant. Just safer that way.)

Don't pay vestal, donate blood. It's free. Win/win

DrDreReturns

I'm not suggesting it is but if you can determine/ eliminate who the father is, it can be beneficial knowing family history or something. granted your not likely to get it as it would have to all be supplied by the father consensually but if you can it can help look out for certain illnesses that are hereditary for example

CandyCane, how are you proposing to force fathers to give DNA samples?

Many men presumably will refuse.

@Strawberry: I am not allowed to donate blood, I am too thin ... which, on consideration, probably means I shouldn't get pregnant, either, anyway.

CandyCane you talk as if women have no idea who is fathering their children. That's just not true for the vast and significant majority.

With the exceptions of stranger rape most women have a pretty good idea who the father of their children is/are.

Dh knows we is the father of our kids.

No way would I do a test to prove it. Just like I wouldn't do a test to prove I haven't slept with someone else.

Imo if you have to prove these things your relationship is already in the shitter.

That's why Jeremy Kyle is pointless. If you find yourself doing tests to prove something, it's already fucked. If you find yourself on JK the relationship is totally fucked and not coming back from that.

People would get killed if this happened. Really, this is about a lot more than money going to the wrong children. It's a really dangerous idea.

vestalvirgin your blood type is tested when you get pregnant as part of your booking in bloods

Almond as I said I don't think it should be compulsory but done so if needed ASAP.

And to the other poster (can't remember the name sorry) as I said its not primarily for women's benefit it's for the men's and children, but for those that have many partners it could help find the father also

@Fatima: Well, but then it is already to late to decide if I want to risk a problematic pregnancy, isn't it?
Donating blood is probably the best idea, I would have to put on weight anyway.

@Candy: I am pretty sure they do genetic testing and all that if a child needs transplants and stuff. Not sure what you are talking about?

Vestal it's really not that big a deal if you're rhesus negative these days. You just get some anti-D injections and report to the hospital if you get a knock or bump from second trimester onwards.

It's very common and something like 25% of the population are rhesus negative so there's really very little point is doing speculative blood tests.

In the old days when anti-D was no routine babies did die, but it was usually a second pregnancy that was at more risk than a first one.

Both my DC were rhesus + so I had to have extra anti-D injections after birth. It was a bit sore but compared to labour a piece of cake.