Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

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

177 replies

inbetweener · 23/02/2012 10:54

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 !!

OP posts:
mojitomania · 23/02/2012 12:23

There is a place for DNA testing though isn' t there. My mum had 10 year affair on my dad during the time my sister was conceived and Dad was never 100% sure she was his.

Sounds like your DH is sort of secretly harbouring some sort of doubt about you OP.

coppertop · 23/02/2012 12:30

Nesbo - Women are expected to take the man's word for it that he hasn't been cheating. Should we now expect all men to take lie detector tests to prove that they haven't?

Nesbo · 23/02/2012 12:37

I think it is a question of consequences. As I said above raising a child is a huge lifelong emotional and financial investment, and for many people (not all) the justification for devoting those resources is that the child is carrying on their genetic inheritance. Take that away and for a lot of people the realisation that they had poured those resources into raising another mans child would make their entire life feel like a lie (and possibly a failure if they ended up never passing on their genes).

Of course men and women can lie to each other about all sorts of things and you can't continually take lie detector tests! But raising a child is a biggie, the biggest most important aspect of most people's lives. I think there is an argument for that to be considered as a special case.

Eaglewings · 23/02/2012 12:37

If DNA tests were offered at the hospital Jeremy Kyle would have less guests!

On a more serious note, even if they were offered many couples would say no, it may be a choice just like having the sex of your child told to you before your baby s born. Some couples want to know, some people don't

theleanandhungrytype · 23/02/2012 12:40

the punishment will fall squarely on the shoulders on an innocent baby.
What punishment? How is the baby being punished? If the parents split up that does not equate to punishment, for the baby will still surely still be loved?

If the baby finds out down the line that their dad is not their biological dad, won't that be MORE punishment?

If anyone is being 'punished' isn't it the innocent father who has done nothing wrong, might not even want kids, but goes along with it because their OH has told them almost the biggest lie it is possible to tell?

FWIW rels should be based on trust not biology IMO

Trills · 23/02/2012 12:42

No matter how much you trust your partner, unless you have kept them locked in a basement you don't KNOW, you just BELIEVE.

OrmIrian · 23/02/2012 12:42

"FWIW rels should be based on trust not biology IMO!"

Precisely what automatic DNA testing would undermine.

theleanandhungrytype · 23/02/2012 12:45

how though? And how is a baby 'punished' if parents split up? And how is the risk of the lie being uncovered later on not more 'punishement?

OrmIrian · 23/02/2012 12:51

Because he loses the chance to have two parents to take care of him. I am well aware that not having a father isn't the end of the world but I am guessing that in most cases being with 2 decent people to love him is better than one. Or he could live with them both and be secretly disliked or resented by the 'father'. Or he could be in a household where there was constant rowing and bitterness.

And for what purpose? So the man could feel confident that he wasn't raising a cuckoo in the nest? A cuckoo that he would otherwise grow to love as his own.

theleanandhungrytype · 23/02/2012 12:54

so children of happy, stable, single parents are worse off, emotionally, than chidren of happy couples (even if that happiness is grounded in betrayal)

An interesting position to take.

Nesbo · 23/02/2012 12:56

The sad thing about "locking them in basements" is that historically perhaps a lot of possessive and controlling behaviour towards women's "chastity" and reproduction has been based on a fear of being duped into raising another man's child, something that could only be prevented by literally locking them away or horribly excessive punishments for infidelity.

A standard DNA test for all with no suggestion of infidelity would give a man the same level of knowledge that the mother has - ie that the baby is undoubtedly his. Perhaps over time that would would make some men more relaxed and less controlling? I don't know but it is an interesting thought.

OrmIrian · 23/02/2012 12:56

I can imagine the scenario in quite a few families-to-be:

Him: "We'd better get that DNA test done today."
her: "Why? Don't you trust me?"
Him: "Of course I trust you. It's just...well you know. Peace of mind."
Her: "Whose peace of mind? Not mine if I know you don't trust me'"
Him: "Why so defensive? Something to hide?"
Her: "No! Of course not, I just can't beleive you don't trust me!"
Him: "I am worried now? I think we should get it done asap!"
Her: "I am devestated that you should think that...."

Etc etc etc

Very helpful start to life as parents.

Nesbo · 23/02/2012 13:00

If it was standard it wouldn't be questioned though, it would be like weighing the baby. I suspect as technology advances there will be far more reasons to assess a baby's DNA anyway, so I think this might be inevitable.

TheRhubarb · 23/02/2012 13:02

OP, if your dh feels that there is something strange about your second dd then you need to have that conversation now. I'd be tempted to order the kit, go through with it and then demand a bloody grovelling apology. Also, if you feel he is suspicious then what does it say about the trust in your own relationship? This is your own personal elephant in the room and it needs putting to bed. You need to have a full blown convo about this and ask him if he really does want a DNA test.

As for offering them at birth, no. I'd like to think that most women are very faithful and this is just another stick to beat women with. Which newspaper were you reading, The Daily Mail?

OrmIrian · 23/02/2012 13:03

It could be taken as standard, but I can't imagine it ever being standard to send out an automated letter along the lines of:

Dear mr NewFather, our DNA results how a 75% probability that you aren't in fact the father.

OrmIrian · 23/02/2012 13:04

" this is just another stick to beat women with"

yes

theleanandhungrytype · 23/02/2012 13:04

I don't think anyone could imagine a letter like that Confused

Nesbo · 23/02/2012 13:07

So your position is that women should know and men should trust.

My argument has been that both partners should know.

TheRhubarb · 23/02/2012 13:12

FFS, both partners DO know - not all women are shagging around like bloody rabbits you know!
A very very very tiny minority of dads are not the real fathers of the children they are bringing up. In fact if you look at the stats, it's not even worth mentioning. Yet they want to spend taxpayers money to ensure every baby has a DNA test? What is this, the Jeremy Kyle show?

There are better things to bloody well worry about.

theleanandhungrytype · 23/02/2012 13:16

but both parents don't know. one knows, one believes

redrubyshoes · 23/02/2012 13:16

I think it would be a very, very difficult secret to keep and I know I couldn't do it. A lifetime of lying.

Horrible thought.

theleanandhungrytype · 23/02/2012 13:17

and where are the stats?

Nesbo · 23/02/2012 13:17

But the men don't "know" do they? They have to trust. That was sort of the point.

I accept that the risk of being lied to and the consequences of that lie might seem insignificant to you, but possibly that is because (barring a billion to one shot) you will never, ever be in the position of unknowingly raising another woman's baby.

HotDAMNlifeisgood · 23/02/2012 13:38

The OP's DH's view is offensive, because it expresses the view that a woman is just a vehicle for a man's seed.

And that raising a child is only worth it if that child has your genetic material.

Nesbo · 23/02/2012 13:41

No it doesn't. It expresses the view that if you are going to commit your life to raising and loving another human being you deserve to know whether that person is your child. At least if you know it is someone else's you can make an informed choice ( just as people do when they choose to adopt or foster).