Soon illegal to perform private paternity tests in Germany?

[Valmy]

I am not sure how it works in Germany, but I would assume it's not a matter of "opinion shopping" but rather you get directed to some independent doctor or commission that gets assigned to your application.

Our systems really are dramatically different.  I cannot even imagine how that work.

[Zanza]

I am not sure how it works in Germany, but I would assume it's not a matter of "opinion shopping" but rather you get directed to some independent doctor or commission that gets assigned to your application.

For an on-demand abortion in the first 12 weeks you need consultation by a third party (doctors or licensed organisations, usually social, sometimes religious) and the wait time.

For medical indications I don't know how it works in detail. It's not in the law, but I am sure there are some kind of administrative rules. In the end, judges can't make doctor's jobs, so I guess a single doctor to sign that you have a medical indication is enough.

[Zanza]

By the way, there was an article on abortion for medical reasons on Spiegel Online today. In the case described there, the fetus was in the 34th week and had a very serious disorder of the brain. The parents wanted an abortion as they thought that they would not be able to cope with a severaly handicapped child and that would constitute unbearable psychological burden for them. The doctors (in form of an ethics committee) denied the abortion and as there is no legal right for parents to demand one, the child was eventually born.

Apparently there is an unwritten rule among doctors - at least in Bavaria - that children that will be able to live are not aborted after the 22nd week.

The article goes on to describe that parents are often left alone with caring for their handicapped children after being denied such an abortion.

[grumbler]

Exactly. So I can't really see what the problem is.

I thought that this was in response to Drakken's diatribe and LOLed.

[grumbler]

You would be surprised, but most European countries, while allowing abortion-on-demand, have very strict time limits on abortions. Usually we try to find a middle-ground compromise here, rather than adopting an all-or-nothing approach that seems to be the case in the US. I think late term abortion are uniformly illegal, unless mother's life is in danger.

You would be surprised, but the European way is the way it is in most the the US as well.  There are several states that allow late-term abortions on demand (CA, I know, is one) but abortion after 20 weeks is quite rare in the US (as elsewhere).

[Drakken]

On the subject...

Today we heard of a "magnificent" story of love, honesty and paternity through La Presse.

A man is in a relationship with a woman, who falls pregnant. Unbeknownst to him, the woman shags at least one other man. Even more, the woman boasts at her workplace, behind his back, that she doesn't know who the real father is.

She gives birth to a daughter, and tells him that he is the father, knowing full well that it is not certain at all. He believes her and raises her as his child. After three years, they separate.

The poor cuckold takes his responsabilities, respect the custody laws, pays the child alimony and continues to take her as her father. One day, the biological father himself comes out of nowhere and calls him to warn him that our poor sod is not the father. His pals also hint to him that she might not be his child after all. He takes a DNA test and, surprise surprise, it comes negative.

Obviously shocked, he immediately cut any contact with the daughter. He went through the courts to have the birth certificate amended and, of course, the child alimony payment stopped.

It went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, and what was its decision? They decided yesterday not to hear the case. In short, "fuck you, pal, you are still his father, there was no fraud, so pull out the wallet and pay her skank of a mommy."

http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2009/2009scc30/2009scc30.html

I am sorry, BB, but our fucking judicial system sucks ass. By this decision, paternity fraud has effectively become legal in Canada at least in jurisprudence. 

33131   G.R. v. I.B., R.R., Directeur de l'état civil

(Que.) (Civil) (By leave)

(Publication ban in case) (Publication ban on party)

Family law - Filiation - Possession of status consistent with act of birth - Whether Court of Appeal erred in interpreting art. 530 C.C.Q.

The Applicant, G.R., and the Respondent I.B. were de facto spouses from December 1998 to June 2005.  On May 7, 2002, I.B. gave birth to a daughter, the Respondent R.R., who has the Applicant's family name.  The act of birth states that the Applicant is the father.  The Applicant cared for R.R. as if he were her father and provided for her support.  After the separation, he continued to exercise access rights regularly.  Shortly after the separation, however, the Applicant received a call from D.B., who stated he was the child's father.  But the Respondent I.B. said that she did not know D.B. and that the Applicant was in fact the child's father.  Other acquaintances of the Applicant subsequently suggested to him that he was not R.R.'s father.  In late 2006, the Applicant had a DNA test done.  He learned in January 2007 that the test proved there was a greater than 99.99 percent chance he was not R.R.'s father.

At that point the Applicant cut all ties with the child.  He then served a motion for rectification of an act of birth and contesting filiation.  He alleged that the fraud committed by the mother had prevented him from giving free and informed consent to the act of birth and that he had acknowledged paternity of the child by mistake.  The Superior Court judge dismissed the motion on the basis that the child had always had possession of status consistent with her act of birth and that art. 530 C.C.Q. prohibited anyone from contesting that status in such circumstances. The Applicant appealed the decision and applied to adduce new evidence to establish that his signature on the act of birth had been forged. The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion to adduce new evidence and affirmed the trial judgment.

July 24, 2008

Quebec Superior Court

(Gendreau J.)

Neutral citation: 2008 QCCS 3471

Motion for rectification of act of birth and contesting filiation dismissed

[Malthus]

On the subject...

Today we heard of a "magnificent" story of love, honesty and paternity through La Presse.

A man is in a relationship with a woman, who falls pregnant. Unbeknownst to him, the woman shags at least one other man. Even more, the woman boasts at her workplace, behind his back, that she doesn't know who the real father is.

She gives birth to a daughter, and tells him that he is the father, knowing full well that it is not certain at all. He believes her and raises her as his child. After three years, they separate.

The poor cuckold takes his responsabilities, respect the custody laws, pays the child alimony and continues to take her as her father. One day, the biological father himself comes out of nowhere and calls him to warn him that our poor sod is not the father. His pals also hint to him that she might not be his child after all. He takes a DNA test and, surprise surprise, it comes negative.

Obviously shocked, he immediately cut any contact with the daughter. He went through the courts to have the birth certificate amended and, of course, the child alimony payment stopped.

It went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, and what was its decision? They decided yesterday not to hear the case. In short, "fuck you, pal, you are still his father, there was no fraud, so pull out the wallet and pay her skank of a mommy."

http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2009/2009scc30/2009scc30.html

I am sorry, BB, but our fucking judicial system sucks ass. 

33131   G.R. v. I.B., R.R., Directeur de l'état civil

(Que.) (Civil) (By leave)

(Publication ban in case) (Publication ban on party)

Family law - Filiation - Possession of status consistent with act of birth - Whether Court of Appeal erred in interpreting art. 530 C.C.Q.

The Applicant, G.R., and the Respondent I.B. were de facto spouses from December 1998 to June 2005.  On May 7, 2002, I.B. gave birth to a daughter, the Respondent R.R., who has the Applicant's family name.  The act of birth states that the Applicant is the father.  The Applicant cared for R.R. as if he were her father and provided for her support.  After the separation, he continued to exercise access rights regularly.  Shortly after the separation, however, the Applicant received a call from D.B., who stated he was the child's father.  But the Respondent I.B. said that she did not know D.B. and that the Applicant was in fact the child's father.  Other acquaintances of the Applicant subsequently suggested to him that he was not R.R.'s father.  In late 2006, the Applicant had a DNA test done.  He learned in January 2007 that the test proved there was a greater than 99.99 percent chance he was not R.R.'s father.

At that point the Applicant cut all ties with the child.  He then served a motion for rectification of an act of birth and contesting filiation.  He alleged that the fraud committed by the mother had prevented him from giving free and informed consent to the act of birth and that he had acknowledged paternity of the child by mistake.  The Superior Court judge dismissed the motion on the basis that the child had always had possession of status consistent with her act of birth and that art. 530 C.C.Q. prohibited anyone from contesting that status in such circumstances. The Applicant appealed the decision and applied to adduce new evidence to establish that his signature on the act of birth had been forged. The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion to adduce new evidence and affirmed the trial judgment.

July 24, 2008

Quebec Superior Court

(Gendreau J.)

Neutral citation: 2008 QCCS 3471

Motion for rectification of act of birth and contesting filiation dismissed

I don't know the Quebec laws involved, but it doesn't strike me as outrageous that a man who treated a child for five years as her father should be held to be, for all intents and purposes, her father.

Think of it this way: I would find it quite outrageous should the bio-dad, years later, drop in and demand a father's rights - should non-bio dad really want to stay dad. He didn't raise her. He had nothing to do with her. Whatever the biological link, he's not acted in the role of dad. Between the two of them, non-bio dad has the rights (and responsibilities). 

Whatever mom's guilt in the matter, it is not the kid's fault, she is her own person. What kind of a man could raise a child to age 5 and then reject her totally because of something her mom did? If I found out Carl wasn't biologically "mine" I'd be right pissed at my wife but I certainly would not suddenly decide I didn't love him any more. 

[Ed Anger]

This was why wire hangers was invented.

[Malthus]

This was why wire hangers was invented.

Kinda hard to use on a five-year-old. They scream and run too much.

[derspiess]

If I found out Carl wasn't biologically "mine" I'd be right pissed at my wife but I certainly would not suddenly decide I didn't love him any more. 

That's because you're a swell guy.  People shouldn't be legally forced into being swell guys, though.

[Ed Anger]

This was why wire hangers was invented.

Kinda hard to use on a five-year-old. They scream and run too much.

Just run faster. They still ain't the best runners at that age.

[Drakken]

On the subject...

Today we heard of a "magnificent" story of love, honesty and paternity through La Presse.

A man is in a relationship with a woman, who falls pregnant. Unbeknownst to him, the woman shags at least one other man. Even more, the woman boasts at her workplace, behind his back, that she doesn't know who the real father is.

She gives birth to a daughter, and tells him that he is the father, knowing full well that it is not certain at all. He believes her and raises her as his child. After three years, they separate.

The poor cuckold takes his responsabilities, respect the custody laws, pays the child alimony and continues to take her as her father. One day, the biological father himself comes out of nowhere and calls him to warn him that our poor sod is not the father. His pals also hint to him that she might not be his child after all. He takes a DNA test and, surprise surprise, it comes negative.

Obviously shocked, he immediately cut any contact with the daughter. He went through the courts to have the birth certificate amended and, of course, the child alimony payment stopped.

It went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, and what was its decision? They decided yesterday not to hear the case. In short, "fuck you, pal, you are still his father, there was no fraud, so pull out the wallet and pay her skank of a mommy."

http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2009/2009scc30/2009scc30.html

I am sorry, BB, but our fucking judicial system sucks ass. 

33131   G.R. v. I.B., R.R., Directeur de l'état civil

(Que.) (Civil) (By leave)

(Publication ban in case) (Publication ban on party)

Family law - Filiation - Possession of status consistent with act of birth - Whether Court of Appeal erred in interpreting art. 530 C.C.Q.

The Applicant, G.R., and the Respondent I.B. were de facto spouses from December 1998 to June 2005.  On May 7, 2002, I.B. gave birth to a daughter, the Respondent R.R., who has the Applicant's family name.  The act of birth states that the Applicant is the father.  The Applicant cared for R.R. as if he were her father and provided for her support.  After the separation, he continued to exercise access rights regularly.  Shortly after the separation, however, the Applicant received a call from D.B., who stated he was the child's father.  But the Respondent I.B. said that she did not know D.B. and that the Applicant was in fact the child's father.  Other acquaintances of the Applicant subsequently suggested to him that he was not R.R.'s father.  In late 2006, the Applicant had a DNA test done.  He learned in January 2007 that the test proved there was a greater than 99.99 percent chance he was not R.R.'s father.

At that point the Applicant cut all ties with the child.  He then served a motion for rectification of an act of birth and contesting filiation.  He alleged that the fraud committed by the mother had prevented him from giving free and informed consent to the act of birth and that he had acknowledged paternity of the child by mistake.  The Superior Court judge dismissed the motion on the basis that the child had always had possession of status consistent with her act of birth and that art. 530 C.C.Q. prohibited anyone from contesting that status in such circumstances. The Applicant appealed the decision and applied to adduce new evidence to establish that his signature on the act of birth had been forged. The Court of Appeal dismissed the motion to adduce new evidence and affirmed the trial judgment.

July 24, 2008

Quebec Superior Court

(Gendreau J.)

Neutral citation: 2008 QCCS 3471

Motion for rectification of act of birth and contesting filiation dismissed

I don't know the Quebec laws involved, but it doesn't strike me as outrageous that a man who treated a child for five years as her father should be held to be, for all intents and purposes, her father.

Think of it this way: I would find it quite outrageous should the bio-dad, years later, drop in and demand a father's rights - should non-bio dad really want to stay dad. He didn't raise her. He had nothing to do with her. Whatever the biological link, he's not acted in the role of dad. Between the two of them, non-bio dad has the rights (and responsibilities). 

Whatever mom's guilt in the matter, it is not the kid's fault, she is her own person. What kind of a man could raise a child to age 5 and then reject her totally because of something her mom did? If I found out Carl wasn't biologically "mine" I'd be right pissed at my wife but I certainly would not suddenly decide I didn't love him any more.

Well, this standard of altruistic paternity isn't the standard of everyone, nor in the animal species, not even in the human species within our social mores.

It is perfectly possible that the pain and the shock is so great to alter one's perception of our relation toward a loved one, even a young child, especially as it is a constant reminder that he was cheated and defrauded, and that no recourse is possible even if his state is due to deceit.

Is it really in the interest of the child to have a legal father who will have nothing but contempt and hatred toward him or her because her mother was a whore?

his, I can surely see whyhe wouldn't want to have anything to do with him or her anymore from now on. It is NOT his child. It would be foolish to pretend that this changes nothing in the relationship; he or she is the product of a fraud with criminal intent.

And the only person he or she will have to blame is the mother. The father here is clearly the victim.

Is it callous? Yes. But there aren't only the interest of the child at stake, but the notion of justice.

[Oexmelin]

That's because you're a swell guy.  People shouldn't be legally forced into being swell guys, though.

Of course they should. We have all sorts of rules and laws against entering agreements in bad faith.

[Drakken]

That's because you're a swell guy.  People shouldn't be legally forced into being swell guys, though.

Of course they should. We have all sorts of rules and laws against entering agreements in bad faith.

Not when it concerns birth certificates, it seems.

[Oexmelin]

Well, this standard of altruistic paternity isn't the standard of everyone, nor in the animal species, not even in the human species within our social mores.

It has been the standard of most human societies for thousands of years and DNA testing has only been available just now. So I would argue we are «socially wired» to preserve a social standard of paternity.