Paternity Tests and the Catholic Church


#1

Does anyone know if the Catholic Church has any opinion on paternity tests? I recently read an article by a woman, Melanie McDonagh, who I thought was a radical feminist. It turns out she is a “Catholic Apologist.” The article can be found here (spectator.co.uk/features/6391918/whos-the-daddy/). She argues that women should have the power to choose who fathers their child and that men do not have a right to know if a child is biologically theirs. That sounds incredible feminist to me and sick. If a woman cheats and hides it she is guilty of sin. It may sound noble for a man to raise a kid that isn’t his but he should have a right to know. We endlessly hear about “woman’s choice” but women aren’t so excited to give men a choice.


#2

[quote="silentfactor80, post:1, topic:313921"]
It turns out she is a "Catholic Apologist."

[/quote]

Not sure where you came by that. Can you share your source that she is a Catholic Apologist?


#3

I don’t know if that’s exactly what she was arguing. Rather, it seems that, in the case of ambiguity (that is, if the mother isn’t sure whether Tom, Dick, or Harry is her baby’s daddy), then traditionally it has been the mother’s prerogative to point to one or the other of them and say, “you’re the father.” I think that she’s saying that, with the advent of DNA, the mother’s ability to do so has been taken away to some extent.

To take the next step, as she does, and call paternity tests “anti-feminist appliance[s] of science”, takes a certain perspective; on its face, the claim is nonsensical – science is neither feminist nor anti-feminist, although those who use the technology that science brings us may fall into those pigeonholes. However, she does have a point when she asserts that “a change in the balance of power between the sexes” is the end result: whereas women used to be able to claim, “no, the baby is my husband’s, not this other guy’s”, now that claim can be assessed for its truth value. McDonagh bemoans the fact that accurate knowledge of paternity leads to “misery, recrimination and guilt.” Yet, it’s not DNA tests that have led to these unfortunate results, and McDonagh makes herself look foolish in asserting so. Rather, “misery, recrimination and guilt” are the direct result of adultery and extra-marital intercourse. If McDonagh wants to paint a villain, it is these human behaviors, and not technology, that deserve her attention.

and that men do not have a right to know if a child is biologically theirs. That sounds incredible feminist to me and sick. If a woman cheats and hides it she is guilty of sin. It may sound noble for a man to raise a kid that isn’t his but he should have a right to know.

I’m not certain that “men do not have the right to know” is exactly the point she’s attempting to make. To tell you the truth, she raises some valid issues. I think McDonagh is pointing out that some men may wish to use paternity tests as a means to justify the termination of their relationships with women who have cheated on them. Keep in mind that the Catholic Church does not require the innocent spouse to leave the marriage, although there are provisions allowing him/her to do so. So, suppose there was a woman – a wife and mother – who makes a mistake, gets pregnant doing so, and repents. She doesn’t tell anyone who the father of her baby is. Suppose further that her husband suspects infidelity. Where does the greater justice lie? In a revelation of the truth that provides him with ‘justification’ for severing the marriage and depriving his children of a two-parent household, or in the truth remaining secret and the marital household remaining intact? It’s a good question…


#4

I wouldn’t call her a Catholic Apologist. She’s more of a Catholic Journalist or a journalist who’s Catholic.


#5

[quote="Gorgias, post:3, topic:313921"]
I don't know if that's exactly what she was arguing. Rather, it seems that, in the case of ambiguity (that is, if the mother isn't sure whether Tom, Dick, or Harry is her baby's daddy), then traditionally it has been the mother's prerogative to point to one or the other of them and say, "you're the father." I think that she's saying that, with the advent of DNA, the mother's ability to do so has been taken away to some extent.

To take the next step, as she does, and call paternity tests "anti-feminist appliance[s] of science", takes a certain perspective; on its face, the claim is nonsensical -- science is neither feminist nor anti-feminist, although those who use the technology that science brings us may fall into those pigeonholes. However, she does have a point when she asserts that "a change in the balance of power between the sexes" is the end result: whereas women used to be able to claim, "no, the baby is my husband's, not this other guy's", now that claim can be assessed for its truth value. McDonagh bemoans the fact that accurate knowledge of paternity leads to "misery, recrimination and guilt." Yet, it's not DNA tests that have led to these unfortunate results, and McDonagh makes herself look foolish in asserting so. Rather, "misery, recrimination and guilt" are the direct result of adultery and extra-marital intercourse. If McDonagh wants to paint a villain, it is these human behaviors, and not technology, that deserve her attention.

I'm not certain that "men do not have the right to know" is exactly the point she's attempting to make. To tell you the truth, she raises some valid issues. I think McDonagh is pointing out that some men may wish to use paternity tests as a means to justify the termination of their relationships with women who have cheated on them. Keep in mind that the Catholic Church does not require the innocent spouse to leave the marriage, although there are provisions allowing him/her to do so. So, suppose there was a woman -- a wife and mother -- who makes a mistake, gets pregnant doing so, and repents. She doesn't tell anyone who the father of her baby is. Suppose further that her husband suspects infidelity. Where does the greater justice lie? In a revelation of the truth that provides him with 'justification' for severing the marriage and depriving his children of a two-parent household, or in the truth remaining secret and the marital household remaining intact? It's a good question...

[/quote]

I think what she was arguing that it is the mothers right to pick the best father. A man should not be forced to shoulder the burden for his wife's infidelity. Do you think a man's wife would willingly raise a child fathered by her husband with a woman who could not care for the child she birthed? I sure don't think so.

I think the point of her article was that men don't matter in reproduction and the woman should be in control. The greater injustice is in telling / living a lie! Would you advocate a man not tell his wife about an affair? What happens if either a man or woman's infidelity brings an STD into the relationship. If a person is sleeping around they could catch something deadly that may cause far more damage than a separated household.


#6

Written by Borgias:

I don't know if that's exactly what she was arguing. Rather, it seems that, in the case of ambiguity (that is, if the mother isn't sure whether Tom, Dick, or Harry is her baby's daddy), then traditionally it has been the mother's prerogative to point to one or the other of them and say, "you're the father." I think that she's saying that, with the advent of DNA, the mother's ability to do so has been taken away to some extent.

To take the next step, as she does, and call paternity tests "anti-feminist appliance[s] of science", takes a certain perspective; on its face, the claim is nonsensical -- science is neither feminist nor anti-feminist, although those who use the technology that science brings us may fall into those pigeonholes. However, she does have a point when she asserts that "a change in the balance of power between the sexes" is the end result: whereas women used to be able to claim, "no, the baby is my husband's, not this other guy's", now that claim can be assessed for its truth value. McDonagh bemoans the fact that accurate knowledge of paternity leads to "misery, recrimination and guilt." Yet, it's not DNA tests that have led to these unfortunate results, and McDonagh makes herself look foolish in asserting so. Rather, "misery, recrimination and guilt" are the direct result of adultery and extra-marital intercourse. If McDonagh wants to paint a villain, it is these human behaviors, and not technology, that deserve her attention.

Writen by SilentFactor80

I'm not certain that "men do not have the right to know" is exactly the point she's attempting to make. To tell you the truth, she raises some valid issues. I think McDonagh is pointing out that some men may wish to use paternity tests as a means to justify the termination of their relationships with women who have cheated on them. Keep in mind that the Catholic Church does not require the innocent spouse to leave the marriage, although there are provisions allowing him/her to do so. So, suppose there was a woman -- a wife and mother -- who makes a mistake, gets pregnant doing so, and repents. She doesn't tell anyone who the father of her baby is. Suppose further that her husband suspects infidelity. Where does the greater justice lie? In a revelation of the truth that provides him with 'justification' for severing the marriage and depriving his children of a two-parent household, or in the truth remaining secret and the marital household remaining intact? It's a good question.../quote]

*Nimzovik Responds: *
*Bolding MIne: *

Surely you are not in favor of allowing this travesty of justice, this** lieing** :bigyikes: to husbands, to men in general are you? Just how misandric would that be?

"It's a good question..." No. it emphatically is not a 'good' question. Falsehood must be exposed and let the cards fall where they may. A woman has no right to make this decision for a man. No woman has any pretense to holiness by living in this state of sin by accepting continuously perpetrating this crime against men. She must tell the man that the child is not his if that is indeed the case, either through adultery or per -existing activities.

Paternity Fraud laws must be enacted to prohibit such heinous behavior before* any* semblance of equality in the legal system is to be taken seriously.

See here: youtube.com/watch?v=bfjZNYV8-2E to see just how pandemic this 'Societie's Sanctioned by Feminist Injustice Against Men' has spread.


#7

[quote="silentfactor80, post:5, topic:313921"]
I think what she was arguing that it is the mothers right to pick the best father.

[/quote]

In the case of ambiguity, in which a woman doesn't know who the father is, and needs someone to step into that role. In the case of marital infidelity, the case she seems to be making is that the wife should be able to assert her husband as the father, for the sake of avoiding the break-up of the marriage and the fall-out on her family.

A man should not be forced to shoulder the burden for his wife's infidelity.

Does that mean that he gets the right to leave his family, if his wife is unfaithful? I don't think that this is always the most noble course of action.

Do you think a man's wife would willingly raise a child fathered by her husband with a woman who could not care for the child she birthed?

Depends. Doesn't this exact situation happen in the case of blended families? The only difference here is the point in time in which the child was conceived.

The greater injustice is in telling / living a lie! Would you advocate a man not tell his wife about an affair? What happens if either a man or woman's infidelity brings an STD into the relationship. If a person is sleeping around they could catch something deadly that may cause far more damage than a separated household.

There are certainly a whole range of considerations; disease is a valid one. However, on the face of it, you're saying that the impact of a marital break-up on the children should have no impact on the way that the wife repents? What if she goes to confession, repents, is forgiven. Would you call that "living a lie"? I'm not so certain...


#8

Gorgias. :wink:

Surely you are not in favor of allowing this travesty of justice, this** lieing** :bigyikes: to husbands, to men in general are you? Just how misandric would that be?

This is but one example of ways that spouses may choose to live out their marriage. You’re not saying that all couples tell their spouses everything, are you? That’s rather naive. I would think that you’re also not saying that spouses should always ‘confess’ everything to their spouse, are you? I mean, “honey, I’m sorry. I looked at the new secretary in the department for 30 seconds as she walked down the hall today. Sorry! Love ya bunches!” :rolleyes:

Yet, in this case, you advocate strict disclosure. Why?

Falsehood must be exposed and let the cards fall where they may.

Tell that to a child of divorce, and see the reaction you get. :wink:

No woman has any pretense to holiness by living in this state of sin by accepting continuously perpetrating this crime against men.

Please define the ‘state of sin’ to which you refer.


#9

Well, as an ambulance chaser if the opossing ambulance chaser wrote like that, I'd feed him to the alli(ti)gators. The article is so laden with bias that it doesn't seem to make much sense to provide individual examples. But since I'm a masochist and I live to debate with dysfunctional debaters because it appeals to my jerk side, lemmie try.

It’s a wise child, they say, that knows its own father. Nowadays, however, wisdom is hardly required

Wisdom vs stupidity to allocate positive and negative associations in a convenient way. Easy.

For the entire course of human history, men have nursed profound, troubling doubts about the fundamental question of whether or not they were fathers to their own children; women, by contrast, usually enjoyed a reasonable level of certainty about the matter.

"Usually" and "reasonable" comes down to the level of risk that somebody may have swapped the children when the family were not looking.

Now, a cotton-wool swab with a bit of saliva, plus a small fee, less than £200, can settle the matter.

So it's too easy? It should be more difficult? It's unfair on the woman that it's now harder to conceal adultery? I have no doubt that the weight of guilt of adultery and the associated social stigma is hard to take, and I have compassion for those who have to carry it. It does seem that their months or years of being a good spouse somehow no longer matter, what matters is that one defining moment of falling to temptation. It happened to my fear friend once, it did indeed feel unfair that a momentary mishap should have such a greatly defining effect on her relationship (she had that one slip, he had had a pattern of mistreating or disregarding her before). But the typical, abstract relationship between the offender and the victim should not be inverted.

At a stroke, the one thing that women had going for them has been taken away, the one respect in which they had the last laugh over their husbands and lovers.

That line made me shiver. Last laugh? Missing the domination? No, it is not unfair that it was taken from you. I'm very happy that it was.

DNA tests are an anti-feminist appliance of science, a change in the balance of power between the sexes that we’ve hardly come to terms with.

Balance of power matters more than fairness, fidelity and basic decency?

The subject has resurfaced lately, courtesy of a story in the Daily Mail, about a married television presenter who for years had been paying for the support of a child conceived, as he thought, as a result of his relationship with a writer. It seems that after meeting the child for the first time, he asked for a DNA test; it duly turned out that he was not, after all, the father. Poor child.

Yes, poor child. But poor child can't be smoke-screen for that "last laugh" and the missing power.

At which point I ought to stop writing because I am stopping being charitable.

Now I can see that some men might rather welcome an end to the old-fashioned scenario whereby they find themselves held to account for the paternity of children born to girls with whom they just happen to have had sex. The actor Jude Law recently found himself in just this position, and unhesitatingly and ungallantly demanded a DNA test.

By contrast, the old situation, in which women presented men with a child, and the man either did the decent thing and offered support, or made a run for it, allowed women a certain leeway. The courtesan in Balzac who, on becoming pregnant, unhesitatingly sought, and got, maintenance from two of her men friends, can’t have been the only one. Uncertainty allows mothers to select for their children the father who would be best for them.

Don't give a noble colouring to promiscuity. First of all the woman should have sex with one man, that being her spouse. It is there where she can apply her "best father" criteria, at the expense of perhaps being a less exciting person than a guy who'd be more exciting as a lover but a less good father.

As a lawyer I've got to say that if you have the full power of presumption in your favour, with your word basically being the law, you should act responsibly about it instead of enjoying it as a power that, well, gives you power.

Well, seems I wasn't able to stop after all. But the article is hogwash.


#10

[quote="Gorgias, post:8, topic:313921"]
You're not saying that all couples tell their spouses everything, are you? That's rather naive. I would think that you're also not saying that spouses should always 'confess' everything to their spouse, are you? I mean, "honey, I'm sorry. I looked at the new secretary in the department for 30 seconds as she walked down the hall today. Sorry! Love ya bunches!" :rolleyes:

[/quote]

As hard as it might be to believe it, as a feminist, I agree with Nimzovik here completely.

How on earth does it serve women to force men to unknowingly raise children they did not father? How does it serve the family to be living a lie? To be cast in the roles of "father" and "child" for life?

Actually, I tell my husband everything, including "I saw a really attractive guy today." :shrug:

And I believe a spouse wronged in any way deserves to be told. In order to be free to make choices about his or her own life, a person needs to know the pertinent facts.


#11

[quote="silentfactor80, post:1, topic:313921"]
She argues that women should have the power to choose who fathers their child.

[/quote]

Does this woman not know how babies are made?:shrug:

The woman chooses who the father of her baby will be when she has sex with him.


#12

[quote="Litcrit, post:10, topic:313921"]
Actually, I tell my husband everything, including "I saw a really attractive guy today." :shrug:

[/quote]

Umm... I'm not meaning to pry or anything but are you actually sure he's okay with that. I'm saying because while I can generally read body language or tones of voice and don't really make a big deal of signs of attraction, I'd generally feel very uncomfortable with a wife or girlfriend specifically telling me that a different guy was attractive (or something else desireable in a partner; I tend to sense trouble in our relationship at that point). I'd prefer not to be told, not to have a conversation about the subject either. But I'm not presuming that every man thinks the same about this.


#13

[quote="chevalier, post:12, topic:313921"]
Umm... I'm not meaning to pry or anything but are you actually sure he's okay with that. I'm saying because while I can generally read body language or tones of voice and don't really make a big deal of signs of attraction, I'd generally feel very uncomfortable with a wife or girlfriend specifically telling me that a different guy was attractive (or something else desireable in a partner; I tend to sense trouble in our relationship at that point). I'd prefer not to be told, not to have a conversation about the subject either. But I'm not presuming that every man thinks the same about this.

[/quote]

I'm sure. :)

We have a very honest relationship, which is possible, I guess, because we have been completely committed to each other from the start. He can tell me everything, too.

Finding someone else attractive is a normal, human thing. It happens. Honesty when it does solidifies the relationship, in my experience. Neither of us would ever dream of acting on it and we both know it.

13 years and counting :)


#14

[quote="Litcrit, post:13, topic:313921"]
I'm sure. :)

We have a very honest relationship, which is possible, I guess, because we have been completely committed to each other from the start. He can tell me everything, too.

Finding someone else attractive is a normal, human thing. It happens. Honesty when it does solidifies the relationship, in my experience. Neither of us would ever dream of acting on it and we both know it.

13 years and counting :)

[/quote]

Yeah, I know it's normal, I just tend to think actually picking up on it in conversation could be detrimental. Like, we all know it exists and we don't really fuss about it but we don't need (or even want) to think about it. Does this make sense?


#15

[quote="Gorgias, post:8, topic:313921"]
This is but one example of ways that spouses may choose to live out their marriage. You're not saying that all couples tell their spouses everything, are you? That's rather naive. I would think that you're also not saying that spouses should always 'confess' everything to their spouse, are you? I mean, "honey, I'm sorry. I looked at the new secretary in the department for 30 seconds as she walked down the hall today. Sorry! Love ya bunches!"

[/quote]

You're equating these things?? Do you also see no difference in severity between taking a pen home from work and stealing a BMW?

A woman has absolutely no right to withold from her husband the fact that she committed adultery and conceived a child from it! Gracious, are we really arguing this???


#16

The** misandry** in such actions, and the ramifications of hiding the true identity of the child's Father (note that I did not say 'Seed Donor') gets even* worse*.

What right does a woman have to hide a child from a Father? :mad:

Her gender? :confused: **Excuse* me? Men help to make babies too! Right? Women have already procured the legal avenues to kill Men's babies in the womb... Just what else do Feminists want to steal from Men - eh? :mad:*

Hello? Where is the **real* Father? Would he not just might like to know that he has a child???? Are we not talking about a form of kidnapping here? Yes we are!*

Good grief.

And when the Child eventually realizes that Dad is not dad (as happened in the above posted link in my previous post) and wants to meet his/her REAL Father...what* then* eh?

Such crimes on the part of women need to be prosecuted.

If such happened to me as a father, and I was not informed of a child of mine, I would sue. Big time.

Women do not own children just because of their their sex. This is sexual inequality. This is sexual discrimination. Let's be real and let's call it what it trully is.

Paternity Fraud is Fraud!


#17

Here is an horrific example of paternity Fraud perpetrated by a woman:
youtube.com/watch?v=ppFBC0Bb9CA

Here is an example of how Men are treated by the legal system and how women use the system to attack men via the inequalities and 'Anti - Male bias of the legal system:
youtube.com/watch?v=ZVCrisGXWFk

And here is yet more abuse: youtube.com/watch?v=drI1YdbTSx8
Note as well! Essentially men go to Debtors Prison :eek: when they loose their job and can not make Child support for kids that he did not sire! :bigyikes:

See here as well! avoiceformen.com/video/women-back-lies-to-enable-paternity-fraud/ for a TV program of non Catholic women's behavior in regard to Paternity Fraud.

Need I say more? **Men **are being **discriminated **against. By Feminists. By the Legal system. It is just. That. Simple. :cool:


#18

There is only one situation where I could see myself wanting to not know who the father of my child was - if I was raped and shortly afterwards discovered I was pregnant. I don't know if my husband would agree with me or not, but I think it might be better for the child and for the family to just assume that he or she was my husband's. I would consult him, of course, but I could see how a situation like that, in which neither the husband or wife are at fault, where a paternity test has the potential to cause additional harm in a family.

Obviously this isn't what the article in the OP was addressing, but I did think of it. Rapists don't deserve paternal rights. As for whether or not the child has a right to know in those circumstances...I don't know. :(


#19

Wow it seems I set off a fire storm here. Circumstances certainly are the key here.

1) If a woman sleeps around, gets pregnant, and the child is not her husbands then she has the responsibility to tell her husband. A loving woman would not expose her husband to disease and shame. Going to Confession is not quite a get out of jail free. If you read the Act of Contrition it says "I firmly resolve, with the help of Your grace, to confess my sins, to do penance and to amend my life." Penance is what the priest gives you but the "amends" are your responsibility. In this case, submitting to God's grace means telling the truth and having faith in God that your husband will forgive you.

2) The case of rape is different but there may come a day when genetics are an issue. Keeping the truth from the child until then can be justified in this case. Also, presumably a woman would tell her husband if this was this was the case so no lie is made here. This is however an extreme example.


#20

[quote="Litcrit, post:13, topic:313921"]
I'm sure. :)

We have a very honest relationship, which is possible, I guess, because we have been completely committed to each other from the start. He can tell me everything, too.

Finding someone else attractive is a normal, human thing. It happens. Honesty when it does solidifies the relationship, in my experience. Neither of us would ever dream of acting on it and we both know it.

13 years and counting :)

[/quote]

Litcrit, it sounds like an ideal match. You are fortunate! There are many very good marriages where it would still not be wise or kind to say such a thing. Not everything "natural" should be said! Which makes me wonder if you and your husband might be "Duals", as are the man and love and I. According to Socionics, Duats are a "perfectly matched" personality pair out of 16 possible kinds of pairs. Duals rarely if *ever *are threatened by each other's thoughts, despite being very different thinking types! So I am curious if the following sounds like you and your husband to you: socionics.com/rel/dlt.htm
(There is tons written on Dual Relations, this is just a brief overview)


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.