Soon illegal to perform private paternity tests in Germany?

[alfred russel]

That's impossible as your children obviously have your talent, intelligence, and good looks.  How could they possibly be anybody else's?

I was trying to put myself in the kind of world that would be created if AR's view was reality.  I would have to shoot someone because I would never give up custody of one of my children to some stranger who happened to have sex with my wife.

All hypothetically speaking of course.

Do you have any choice in the matter, regardless? Once you are divorced, if she has the kids their primary male figure will be any guy that happens to stay with her.

[crazy canuck]

I'm assuming that we are looking at this from the other angle first: support payments. As I said before, it makes some sense to hold both the biological and "adoptive" fathers as liable

Yes, this is the problem with your logic.  You assume that this idea has merit.  And then assuming your idea has some merit you come to the conclusion that since the sperm donor is paying they should also get some custody rights.

But you have assumed away the problem.  On what basis would a sperm donor have to claim any parental rights in the first place.  I would fight hard against the implementation of any system that gave parental rights simply on the basis of whether a person was willing to pay in order to obtain those rights.

Its seems you have it backwards.  You first need to establish the right to be a parent.  Only then do the obligations of parenthood become relevant.

[crazy canuck]

Do you have any choice in the matter, regardless? Once you are divorced, if she has the kids their primary male figure will be any guy that happens to stay with her.

You are talking about something else now.  Of course divorce changes everything.  As my kids would say "Duh!"

What does that have to do with the ability of a sperm donor to claim parnental rights?  Even ifmy wife and I did get divorced that still gives no parental rights to the donor.  All rights still vest in the mother and I.

[alfred russel]

I'm assuming that we are looking at this from the other angle first: support payments. As I said before, it makes some sense to hold both the biological and "adoptive" fathers as liable

Yes, this is the problem with your logic.  You assume that this idea has merit.  And then assuming your idea has some merit you come to the conclusion that since the sperm donor is paying they should also get some custody rights.

But you have assumed away the problem.  On what basis would a sperm donor have to claim any parental rights in the first place.  I would fight hard against the implementation of any system that gave parental rights simply on the basis of whether a person was willing to pay in order to obtain those rights.

Its seems you have it backwards.  You first need to establish the right to be a parent.  Only then do the obligations of parenthood become relevant.

[/quote]

But in the current world, you already gain parental rights and responsibilities by being "a sperm donor." The issue at hand is whether you should lose them because another man took care of the kid for a few years (possibly under false pretenses).

I do agree that the rights and obligations should be made secondary to the person who actually served in the role of father, but in the real world that person often fails to meet their responsibilities.

[alfred russel]

You are talking about something else now.  Of course divorce changes everything.  As my kids would say "Duh!"

What does that have to do with the ability of a sperm donor to claim parnental rights?  Even ifmy wife and I did get divorced that still gives no parental rights to the donor.  All rights still vest in the mother and I.

If you aren't getting divorced, will apparently still cohabitate with the wife and kids, but now want someone else to foot the bill? I agree that would be ridiculous.

If you are getting divorced, see my post above this one.

[crazy canuck]

But in the current world, you already gain parental rights and responsibilities by being "a sperm donor." The issue at hand is whether you should lose them because another man took care of the kid for a few years (possibly under false pretenses).

I do agree that the rights and obligations should be made secondary to the person who actually served in the role of father, but in the real world that person often fails to meet their responsibilities.

Really?

I missed it then.  What rights and responsibilities does a biological father have if another man has been the father in fact.  I thought it was just something you were asserting.

You want to create a system that assumes that father in fact will abdicate his responsibilities if he learns he is not the biological father.  Why not create a system which is contingent on that rather then one that presumes that all fathers would act like Drakken.

[Drakken]

But in the current world, you already gain parental rights and responsibilities by being "a sperm donor." The issue at hand is whether you should lose them because another man took care of the kid for a few years (possibly under false pretenses).

I do agree that the rights and obligations should be made secondary to the person who actually served in the role of father, but in the real world that person often fails to meet their responsibilities.

Really?

I missed it then.  What rights and responsibilities does a biological father have if another man has been the father in fact.  I thought it was just something you were asserting.

You want to create a system that assumes that father in fact will abdicate his responsibilities if he learns he is not the biological father.  Why not create a system which is contingent on that rather then one that presumes that all fathers would act like Drakken.

My point isn't incompative with the first sentence. I would abdicate my rights, personally, and kick the child and the mother out of my house, but it remains my personal choice nonetheless.

[alfred russel]

Really?

I missed it then.  What rights and responsibilities does a biological father have if another man has been the father in fact.  I thought it was just something you were asserting.

Obviously none--else there wouldn't be this thread. :p

But the biological father is put on the hook if the mother didn't find someone to take care of the child (which in some cases occurred through false pretenses). How is it fair to the mother, or in the best interest of the child, if the adoptive father is delinquent or unable to make payments but the biological father is able? If the mother didn't live with a guy the first couple of years of the child's life, the biological dad would have to provide funding through college, but because a deadbeat was there at the start he is off compelely free? Whose interest is that in?

You want to create a system that assumes that father in fact will abdicate his responsibilities if he learns he is not the biological father.  Why not create a system which is contingent on that rather then one that presumes that all fathers would act like Drakken.

I'm wanting to create a system that takes into account the fact that many fathers do abdicate their responsibility, and maximizes the opportunity of the child to receive support payments.

[Palisadoes]

I think all children should be given a paternity test upon birth.

[crazy canuck]

I'm wanting to create a system that takes into account the fact that many fathers do abdicate their responsibility, and maximizes the opportunity of the child to receive support payments.

But in doing so you would intrude on the rights of fathers who do no abdicate their reponsibilities.  Not very sound social policy there.  Why not create a system that only takes away the rights of fathers in fact, if they do abdicate their responsbilities.  If that were so I would have no quarrel with you.

The only quarrel I have is that you propose a system that some sperm donor can, as of right, assert some limited form of custody rights.  When I try to put myself in that kind of situation I shudder at the thought.

[crazy canuck]

I think all children should be given a paternity test upon birth.

I think all prospective parents should be tested for suitability.  This thread has done nothing to dissuade me of the correctness of that view.  Indeed it has made me reconsider my views about opposing sterilization 

[alfred russel]

I'm wanting to create a system that takes into account the fact that many fathers do abdicate their responsibility, and maximizes the opportunity of the child to receive support payments.

But in doing so you would intrude on the rights of fathers who do no abdicate their reponsibilities.  Not very sound social policy there.  Why not create a system that only takes away the rights of fathers in fact, if they do abdicate their responsbilities.  If that were so I would have no quarrel with you.

The only quarrel I have is that you propose a system that some sperm donor can, as of right, assert some limited form of custody rights.  When I try to put myself in that kind of situation I shudder at the thought.

Okay, then I don't think we have any disagreement. I originally posted for this to be mediated by a judge, who presumably wouldn't be turning over a kid to a sperm donor parent when an actual parent was around and living up to his obligations.

[Palisadoes]

I think all children should be given a paternity test upon birth.

I think all prospective parents should be tested for suitability.  This thread has done nothing to dissuade me of the correctness of that view.  Indeed it has made me reconsider my views about opposing sterilization 

I agree. Women should definitely stay at home and raise the kids rather than going to work.

[crazy canuck]

Okay, then I don't think we have any disagreement. I originally posted for this to be mediated by a judge, who presumably wouldn't be turning over a kid to a sperm donor parent when an actual parent was around and living up to his obligations.

Which brings me back to the point of why the father in fact would even have to face that kind of process if he fufilled all his fatherly duties.

I can see no justification for any court interference unless he abdicates his responsibilities.

[crazy canuck]

I agree. Women should definitely stay at home and raise the kids rather than going to work.

Ok, not sure how you got from dads who would walk away from their kids if they found out they were not the biological fathers to that statement....