dp has just made such an offensive statement....

[inbetweener]

I am so angry.

We were having a conversation about an article in the paper about babies and all of a sudden he pipes up with " well I think a DNA test should be offered as standard as soon as your baby is born " Wtf !!!!!

I asked him why and he said that it would stop a lot of men being fooled and forced to bring up another man's child !

I have just flown into a rage and we have had a massive row. He seems not to see how fucking offensive that is. I can't get through to him that that suggests there is no trust !! He said, yeah but it eliminates doubt !!!!!
What !!!
Am I wrong to be so offended ? And wondering where my dh is and who this Dick is in his place !!

Oh, just seen you feel it was personal. Oddly enough, I would be more angry at DH infering that our newborn looked like his friend.

Surely DNA tests aren't the 'norm' in healthy relationships?

Have I just woken up on the Jeremy Kyle show?

Maybe give him a textbook on human biology first, then the number for the DNA testing clinic. Then a list of flats to rent.

He sounds thoughtless and slightly aggressive.

Has he actually sat and THOUGHT about what he's saying by his remarks, how damaging he is being?

If it were me, I would do the DNA test, you know. And I would make sure that his parents, his friend and anyone close to us knew that I'd done it, and why. And then I'd tell him to learn from this lesson and be thoroughly ashamed of his nasty, suspicious, undermining attitude to life and relationships.

Mind you, OP sounds a bit volatile.

But taking the personal element out of it, I just can't imagine how the consequences would be an improvement. Assuming that the mother was married to the man who turned out not to be the father. then what? Either a massive split and maybe a divorce. If not a divorce, a relationship with a serious crack in it and a child who might well never feel at home in his own family. And what happened if the real father wasn't interested, or married himself. Such complete chaos and misery caused because of man's right to know that his wife had played away. What would it acheive apart from a huge sense of grievance by the man, and dislocation for the child. But I guess if it made the mother feel guilty it would all be worth it eh?

ip feding stuff aside, I would be irked at a comment like that too.

IMO only a man that had doubts would say something like that...and that thought would make me react to a comment like your DP made.

I can understand a man with serious doubts that have some foundation wanting a test. but for the default setting to be that women are not to be trusted that really sucks in my mind.

OOps drip feeding

Dont know what went wrong in my first post!

No i dont think DNA tests should be the norm in a healthy relationship that was sort of my point.

Lol I'm not volatile I'm bloody angry.

I have tried to explain to him that by asking for a DNA test you are essentially expressing no trust whatsoever . If you trust me then you KNOW your child is yours and that I would not do it.

If he is really talking generally as he now claims he is then its still wrong !!

No he is normally fine. Not a Dick.

Amberleaf that is what I said to him when he said it. If your default setting is that no woman is to be trusted until proved otherwise then Wtf !!! I don't want that sort of shitty attitude round my dds !!

It's tricky isn't it. On the one hand maybe you'd want to know - OTOH a lot of those men unknowingly bringing up other men's DC love them as their own, and I'd guess those families are probably happier that way.

Imagine though if the woman was the one who didn't know if it was hers. Obviously because of the biology that's not very likely - but in theory - how would you feel, carrying and bringing up a baby and knowing it might not be yours, but you would never be 100% sure? Since there is now the technology to find out, you can see why it would cross some men's minds.

I think a lot of men would choose reassurance from a DNA test, not because they truly think their child is someone else's but because it closes down the possibility from ever entering their head. Ultimately, a man only has a woman's word and trust that the baby is his, and although that should be and is enough for most people, due to the very small percentage that do lie (or simply don't know), it can create suspicion. I would not entertain actually doing a DNA test though, and I would probably shout at my husband if he suggested they become routine.

But I have known lots of men have the odd doubt, talking with male friends, and in my own situation, even though they know they are irrational and highly unlikely. Doesn't stop that 'am I the 1 in 25?' thought.

I think the point is you feel he was having a dig at you. Otherwise, it's the kind of comment someone throws out, everyone disagrees with, and it's eventually discarded.

I know a man who is not the father of the DD he adores. I wish his DW had told him and not told me.

But of course men could always take some responsibility for contraception if they want sex & no baby...

Yes but that's nothing to do with the non-biological dad is it?

'I think a lot of men would choose reassurance from a DNA test, not because they truly think their child is someone else's but because it closes down the possibility from ever entering their head.'

• this is it, too, OP.

How sad for your DP that he's this kind of person - one of the distrusting, paranoid lot who, despite there being actually no evidence at all, suspect that they're being taken for a ride by their fellow humans at every turn and twist.

Poor bloke. What a sorry old way to think.

The time taken to conceive a first pregnancy is no indicator whatsoever for the second.

A colleague had ivf. She told us that one thing that was stressed over and over at the clinic was that it was imperative to use some form of contraception after the birth. Apparently, pregnancy can have an effect on fertility, and if people didn't there had been a high number of 'accidents'.

Also, there are the people who conceive easily the first time, but never do again.

If 1 in 25 men are bringing up a child that isn't theirs then surely that means 24 out of 25 are bringing up children that are theirs?

I would find it offensive. He is saying that the default position is that pregnant women should be assumed to be liars until they have proved otherwise.

One of XH's jolly stunts was to suggest that the DCs might not be his. I don't think he actually believed it though. I wouldn't want a DNA test because they aren't 100% reliable (especially from some random company you'd picked off the internet or the small ads) and even a reliable test may come back inconclusive. XH would of course have taken "inconclusive" to mean "definitely shagged around", because he is an arse.

omriiman I just can't imagine how the consequences would be an improvement.

Surely if you start with the proviso that what they don't know won't hurt them you can do pretty much whatever you want to so long as your OH doesn't find out? Is that a good way to form the basis of a rel?

I am not saying men can't love children who are not theirs at all, but surely thinking 'oh well as long as he doesn't find out' is a bit hurftul?

Well we just spoke again. I raised a few of your points.
He said under no circumstances was he implying that our dc were not his. I have to take him at his word hmmm
I then said that even if it was generally I still found it offensive as it implied that women were not to be trusted until proved otherwise. His response was that it benefited both parties to have a DNA test as standard. Therefore it removed all doubt and also stopped men from shirking responsibility . Hmmm i think he's had an hour to rethink and is now covering his tracks personally ! It's still peed me off and I still think its wrong.

"Is that a good way to form the basis of a rel?"

No. It isn't.

But once the baby is here, what is the point of exposing the mother's behaviour? You might argue that she shouldn't have been unfaithful but the punishment will fall squarely on the shoulders on an innocent baby.

I think it is very easy for women to condemn this because realistically they will never have a shadow of a doubt that a child is theirs. If you took that absolute certainty away and expected them to make the most enormous emotional and financial commitment for the rest of their life based purely upon whether they believe the word of their partner, I think they would be a bit more sympathetic.

How many stories do you see on here of women whose lives are turned upside down because the partner they trusted absolutely turned out to have lied. Now imagine somehow that the consequence of that discovery is that the woman realises that the children she has been raising are not genetically her own and perhaps she might never have the chance to have her own children.

It is a huge life altering gamble that requires the most enormous amount of trust. Is it really any surprise in a world where people can and do lie that some guys find it hard to trust someone (perhaps anyone) that much and would prefer to have proof?