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 !!

Agree with Stewie.
How can any woman even think this would be a good idea.
Just that this has been suggested.

I agree with stewie.

In these times when we are focusing on providing essential services (and struggling to maintain basic levels if care) noone is going to be volunteering to fund this even if it was a good idea.

Keeping a DNA sample of all men on file would turn this situation round nicely.

If they knew that they would have to bear the consequences then you'd have a lot less of the fuck and fuck off. They might think about using a condom. They might think about developing some contraception that fucks with their mechanisms instead of ours. I'm sure some sort of copper rod in each bollock would work? Oh but that sounds inhumane? It didn't stop the medical profession from trying to find things to put in our wombs did it?

Why should women always be the ones having to justify themselves? The DNA testing could equally be used to make men take responsibility.

*This is all just words. I'm not going to back it up or start fundraising.

Yes, that was my point exactly Nagoo. It only has to be 'another stick to beat women with' if you want it to be. It could just as easily be turned on its head and made to be about supporting women. I don't much care where the magical budget would come from because I am only musing hypothetically!

To be honest if we could find the budget we would all benefit from every single person's DNA being held on a database from birth and I'm sure (in highly developed countries at least) that one day it will happen.

OOH this would infuriate me too! Definitely insinuating lack of trust and suggesting that you could of slept with someone else, I would be fuming too....even if it was in his head just a thought!

"If they knew that they would have to bear the consequences then you'd have a lot less of the fuck and fuck off."

Excellent point, so compulsory DNA testing would benefit women too - guys would be less likely to bonk and run because they'd be caught anyway, and CSA would have a much easier time finding them, saving a fortune in the process.

As far as cost is concerned, a typical birth costs the NHS ~£1600 I believe, and DNA testing when done on a large scale would be less than a tenth of that. I think a 10% increase to NHS birthing costs would definitely be justified. especially when you consider the police savings a generation later when we've got more or less all criminals DNA on record from birth.

Oh to live in this mythical magical land where men who have been proven to have fathered a child automatically start paying up a realistic amount of money towards his/her upbringing.

Maybe we could save even more money by having all men signing a contract which says that if they have unprotected sex with a woman then they will automatically have to take responsibility if that woman becomes pregnant, even if they are not the actual biological father.

Cost to NHS = zero.
Cost to taxpayer = paper, printing costs, and someone to word the agreement.
CSA saves money on tracking men down.
Increases incentive to use condoms.

Or maybe we could just presume that most women are not liars and cheaters, and leave it to individuals to organise DNA testing for themselves if there is a lack of trust?

"Maybe we could save even more money by having all men signing a contract which says that if they have unprotected sex with a woman then they will automatically have to take responsibility if that woman becomes pregnant, even if they are not the actual biological father."

Hehe, that might stop some of them 'playing away' when their wives/partners are pregnant or busy with very young children which seems to be quite a common occurance if these threads are anything to go by.

OP - are you sure he is not talking about himself or any of his friends when he spouts on about not being able to trust someone? In my experience when a man starts making unfounded accusations it is often their own guilty consciences talking. I'm not suggesting that he is guilty but if his friends are as misogynistic (sp?) as him then I imagine he is fully aware that one of the most common times for men to be unfaithful is when their wives are pregnant/breast feeding etc as they (the men) are no longer the focus of attention.

I think it's a creepy thing for him to have said, personally, but, as I said, I think that he is either a bit 'woman hating' or has some kind of agenda going on here.

Also - suppose the OP was to be DNA tested and the results were as expected. What happens then? He runs around going 'whooopy' they really ARE my children - darling I love you so much!'

This is a specifically woman-hating version of the same old shit that stupid people always fall for 'If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear, let Authority treat you as though you are a potential liar/cheat/criminal, because after all it's for everyone's good to assume that everyone just might be a bad person.'

If this was done from a dna collection pov for the compilation of a database for the police it would only include babies born in this country and wouldn't take into account immigration at all. Unless you make it compulsory for all immigrants to submit their dna it would defeat the point wouldnt it?

To every man who feels tricked into his partner getting pregnant, then be responsible for your own contraception.
Use a condom.
I can't stand the attitude that so many men think the woman should be responsible,.

Well that's very true of course, but at what point is a man entitled to feel safe to not use a condom? Imagine this:

'AIBU to suspect that my OH has something to hid, or that he does not trust me? We have been together 5 years and are engaged and want children eventually but not yet. Even though I am on the pill/have a coil/have an implant my OH insists on using condoms. I feel offended. I have never been unfaithful, and I would not give him an STD so why does he do this? Either he thinks I am unfaithful and infectious, or he is cheating on me and thinks he may pass on an STD or he thinks I am out to trick him into having a child before he is ready, and I cannot be in a relationship with such an obvious lack of trust. Am I right to feel offended that after all this time he is treating me like a one night stand?'

Of it would be nice, wouldn't it, if they finally invented a male pill or a male implant, but would we trust them to take it? I wouldn't.

Of course it would be nice....

SGM I don't believe any of the stuff I wrote would actually be a good idea. It scares me that anyone would.

Just wanted to add to the debate.

I think if it was a baby that was concieved without the parents being in a relationship then its a good idea.

Its a bit of a blokey thing to say but I wouldn't fly off at him for it...........

If my husband asked for DNA testing on our children I would leave him. We tried for ds for two years. We had unprotected sex once when I fell pregnant with dd. he knows they are both his.

Hmm. When I found out I was pregnant with DS, I rang his dad and asked if he would meet me for a drink. We met, I took a deep breath and said I am pregnant.. He took an equally deep breath and said 'Is it mine?' I pointed out to him that if it hadn't been his I would be having the conversation with whoever else it was.
BUT I wasn't outraged or offended by him asking. We were not in a couple-relationship at the time so both at liberty to have sex with anyone we wanted.

I did know that DS was his dad's because it's the only time in my entire life that I was ever that careless about contraception I hadn't actually shagged anyone else within the relevant four or five weeks.

My point is (it's late, I have been out on the lash) that it's perfectly OK to wonder about which sperm hit the egg when there is not a couple-relationship going on, which there certainly wasn't in my case, but to act as though every happy, committed, heteromonogamous mother might be a liar who can't keep her knickers on is really quite horrible.

Quite a lot of very defensive women on here...interesting.

Yep, clearly all shagging away and worried about being caught out.

SGB, that was my experience too as a man, although my wife was in a relationship immediately before seeing me so there was Jeremy Kyle levels of doubt about paternity. The 12 week scan appeared to rule me out, but the 20 week was more in my favour. In the early days I did think about a DNA test, but my DD is 9 months now and it just seems a bit irrelevant. I do wonder that when she grows up she might find it relevant though, and thus the worm of doubt does wriggle away sometimes.

At the time we did discuss it and I reassured my wife that any child i raised with her would be mine, regardless. It would be loved, nurtured and taught by me, would share my experiences, thoughts and most deeply held beliefs.

Surely this is what fatherhood is, rather than merely providing some gene soup? Where would compulsory DNA testing get you, other than introducing doubt into the minds of people who have no need for it?

inabeautifulplace - unfortunately not all men are like you - some do baulk at bringing up DC not their own. But it's not even about that, is it - it's the whole "have you been shagging around behind my back" implication in the question. :(

Whatmeworry - are you honestly saying that because there are a lot of women on here arguing against this, that we are therefore doing so because we've been shagging away and are lying to our partners about them being the father of our kids?

So we can no longer have a discussion without there being an ulterior motive right?

I would like to tell you where to shove that comment but that would be rude and sinking to your level so I won't.

SGB - would you have been offended if that bloke asked you to do a DNA test?

The crux of the matter here is that this is NOT an argument about whether every single baby should have their DNA kept on record. This is specifically about whether or not every single baby should have a DNA check to discover whether it matches to the father or not. My argument against holding the DNA records of every single person would be very different and refer a lot to Orwell's 1984. My argument against THIS kind of DNA testing for THESE particular reasons is simple:

It goes by the assumption that women are serial shaggers and have children by deceit. I refer once again to The Guardian article with figures from the CSA that proved that of the men who applied for DNA tests, only 0.2% discovered they were not the father.

With such a tiny minority is it worth the expense and humiliation of testing every single baby born?

Also as SGM pointed out, what about those women who were raped? Or abused? What about their rights to privacy?

If this was discussed as a serious idea, it would mean that the rights of 0.2% of men outweigh the rights of every single woman.

And should the DNA be used to prove paternity for the CSA, there is absolutely NO guarantee that the women will receive maintenance payments as many many Mumsnetters will testify to. Even where there is no doubt as to who the father is, chasing the errant father up to contribute towards his offspring costs the taxpayer thousands.

I am appauled that there are women contributing to this thread who cannot see the lack of respect for women that this leads to, a lack of respect which is shown by whatmeworry's comment which infers that the only reason some women are so angry about this is because they are deceitful adulterers. That is the attitude that hypothetical ideas like this encourage. I am really flabberghasted that some of you don't see that.

TheRhubarb: If I had been in any doubt I would have suggested DNA testing. But DS dad and I are old friends who are prepared to believe in each other's basic decency and goodwill: he knew I was telling the truth about the not-having-shagged-anyone-else in the relevant timespace.

Actually, if he had asked for one, I would probably have said 'OK' though I would have been a little narked that he was basically calling me a liar.