comment: >
  
  A UK study found that 1/25 fathers are unknowingly raising children that aren't theirs. The MGTOW groups would make you think its higher, but fuck me I wouldn't even put $10 24/25 odds. I hate gambling. 
  What is being discussed in this post is paternity test at birth. So there is no case of abandoning the child after spending years with them. These rapid post birth tests take a matter of hours at the hospital. So you have your results by the next day.
context: /u/sqeeky_wheelz (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
  All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
  Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
  ^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards >
  
  Legally, they're two different things.
  A prenup is designed to protect past assets i.e. pre-matrimonial assets.
  A paternity test is just whether you pay child maintenance or not. Bear in mind I'm English law based so if you can show the kid isn't yours you don't have to pay. It doesn't determine anything else. 
  When it comes to validity of prenups, if there's no mention/provision for the kid (or child of the family, if not bio kid) then the pre nup may come up for challenge. >
  
  My post isn’t that they are the same. My point is that 1) everyone should have a prenup 2) every child should have factually proven paternity. 
  If the assumed father is not the biological father 2 things should happen 1) the biological father should have a right to their child’s life. 2) the assumed father should not be held liable for child support (unless they so choose to support/care for the child) >
  
  The existence of divorce laws renders prenups useless and a waste of money for the vast majority of first marriages where neither party has a pot to piss in. 
  Why the hell should everybody get a prenup when most people do not have assets until long after they are married? >
  
  Why we got a prenup: 
  Scenario: one party stays home to take care of the kids at the sacrifice of their career and the other works hard at building a career (because the other spouse has stayed home to run the household). 
  Fast forward 25 years: kids are grown and the marriage has fallen apart. Because of any of the following: cheating, been lazy, been rude, simply drifted apart, one realized they were gay, etc etc etc. 
  The stay at home parent has: no career history, no pension, no savings/emergency fund. Other than shared assets (home, cars) the stay at home parent is now 45-60 and has no financial security. They will divorce and hopefully some of the working spouses money will be split equitably - but sometimes this does not happen. Depending on local laws any company retirement meat solely be theirs. Maybe they have other ways of “hiding” assets. 
  Having a prenup agreeing that the working spouse is required to pay them alimony or other “allowances/protections” to ensure that the stay at home spouse is not destitute. 
  A colleague of mine recently divorced. After lawyer fees she ended up with $5K to her name. She is living on her own with her 2 kids (shared custody) with no alimony. At 47 she is back in the work force for… ever probably. Hopefully her kids will be successful enough for her to live with them in her old age.
  Edit to add: if you have a good lawyer make your prenup, it should NOT be rendered useless. In my country they definitely hold up. >
  
  It seems like your country’s laws are very different then the state where I got married, which had laws that covered many of these issues for first marriages that a prenup can’t contradict. That said, I can see how your kind of prenup could help make a divorce less acrimonious by prearranging financial responsibilities. 
  Perhaps your saying that a paternity test will similarly reduce the risk of any ugly surprises if a divorce occurs. I didn’t get a paternity test because I would like paternal rights if a divorce occurred, which in my country, I would have even if I’m not the biological father.  Paternal rights extend beyond paying child support and includes visitation and say over important decisions for the child. Mothers don’t magically get the kids and fathers have to pay them to take care of them. >
  
  Yes! Absolutely. I don’t think I’ve explained myself very well in my post, as people have been quiet hostile, attacking my character and marriage. But, such is the internet. 
  Imagine a man who’s child was raised by someone else - he tried to challenge paternity but the mother would not do a dna test. He had to watch someone else raise (what later turned out to be) his kid. Heart breaking! She could have prevented it, but spitefully didn’t. 
  I heard of this happening through the grapevine so I posted here - also because I do love a debate. >
  
  There is one main difference. A prenup is insurance for the future, but a DNA test is insurance on the present.
  Prenups make sense because no matter how much you trust a person now, things can change. Many people get divorced not because they were incompatible when they got married, but because the events of life made them incompatible later on. It is impossible to predict those things or even prevent them from happening. They just happen. Maybe one of the spouses gets fired from their local job, and gets an offer in a different city in a different state/province, or even country. When you married that person 10 years ago, you didn't think that moving away from your friends and family would become necessary. So, even if you trust your partner 100% in the present, a prenup is perfect sensible because you cannot guarantee that this trust will remain through all the hurdles of life
  A DNA test is different because it doubts the current state of the relationship. You are not thinking about what might happen in the unforeseen future, you are directly challenging your partner for their present actions. This means that you presently doubt your partner, which is a bit problomatic. If you don't trust your partner at present, maybe you should not be in the present relationship.
  Now, I am not saying that you should blindly trust people, and don't think a DNA test is necessarily a bad idea. However, your argument isn't that DNA tests are good, but that they are no different than prenups. If your argument is mostly about both these measure being the same, then I refute that by saying the big difference is what type of trust is being challenged. Prenups challenge the unpredictable trust that nobody know how will develop in the future. DNA tests challenge the current trust a couple has. I would say that challenging the future is more sensible than challenging the present, and certainly less abrasive in a relationship.
  EDIT: Also, prenups are even-sided, while DNA tests are one sided. If the husband asks the wife for a prenup, it is not just doubting the wife, but also doubting him. If the husband asks the wife for a DNA test, he doubts her 100%. Again, this does not mean to say they are good or bad, only that these function in a fundamentally different way. >
  
  Finally! Okay this is the kind of debate I posted for. 
  Yes the future vs present perspective is a good one, !delta 
  Possibly every prenup should include a clause that a paternity test will be done? Then it’s both I suppose. >
  
  
  Possibly every prenup should include a clause that a paternity test will be done?
  
  That's a sensible compromise. You trust her getting pregnant now, but who knows about her getting pregnant ten years from now. >
  
  I'm seeing prices around $1600. Go for it if you want to, no one is stopping you. Seems like it is like a prenup in that only those with money will be doing it. >
  
  This mindset would be indicative of paranoia or mistrust, which would be a deal-breaker in a potential partner for me. For those that don’t care about these things, sure.  It’s a fine system. >
  
  Babies aren’t always made with romantic or trust partners though. Lots of people are doing the fwb thing without commitment. >
  
  And they are free to order DNA testing in any children they are required to support.
  Leave the rest of us out of these shitty relationships, please. >
  
  
  NOT all children come from happily married wives and husbands.
  
  Likewise,  NOT all people need a paternity test.
  
  LOTS of babies are made outside of our sacred vows and two people assume paternity
  
  LOTS more aren't.
  
  Our system has room for improvement.
  
  If you want or feel the need for a paternity test, then get one.   That's not a 'system'. >
  
  Who will shoulder the cost of routine paternity testing? In my country, we have national health care which is free at the point of use, and they definitely won't pay for unnecessary tests.
  I admit I am not overly familiar with American health care, however is there a risk that only well off partners will get paternity tests and normalising it will create another divide between rich and poor? Would insurance companies pay?
  If the parents have to pay out of pocket, why would they pay extra for something they don't think they need? It's not like a house fire or robbery where you don't know what will happen in the future; the mother is already pregnant. If you aren't sure because one night stand, get the test like people already do. >
  
  I would see it very differently. A prenup is in the case of future, unpredictable, and uncertain changes in the relationship. We can never know what will change in the future and it makes sense to protect against it. 
  On the other hand, a paternity test is about the past. It’s to make sure there was no past breach of fidelity. I, as the woman, know I did not cheat. I trust that my partner has not cheated. Asking me to get a paternity test would be tantamount to saying you don’t trust me. If my partner insisted, I would acquiesce to the request but I’d also end the relationship because I won’t be with someone who wrongly suspects me of cheating. >
  
  This is very similar to the comment I have a delta to earlier, so yes here you are !delta 
  This is an actual distinction between the two. I was actually never thinking of married children when I posted - I think there’s way more children that come from homes that get together because of the pregnancy if that makes sense, so that’s more what I was thinking of. 
  As a married woman I wouldn’t object to a pat test if I had a kid, just as I don’t object to my dr screening for STI’s at my pap smear, but from the very emotional backlash I’ve gotten here today I see I’m the minority in the “happily married” camp that doesn’t care if a pat test is don’t because it’ll just prove what I know (and who doesn’t like a little validation now and then?) 
  I put the important part in ***’s because I’m tired of being told I’m psychotic for not caring. >
  
  Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/angstyaspen (1∆).
  ^Delta System Explained ^| ^Deltaboards >
  
  They are similar but I can maybe see some good reasons for a paternity test (but not within a good marriage), on the other hand prenups are a bad idea. 
  If you need a prenup, you shouldn't be getting married. >
  
  Most men who were victims of paternity fraud trusted their wives. Stop blaming men for wanting to protect themselves. >
  
  Previously, you couldn't do a DNA test on a fetus without an amniocentesis, which carries some level of risk (for mother and fetus). 
  I've heard there's a maternal blood test that can determine paternity now, though I'm not sure how available it is.
  What level of risk do you think is acceptable for a prenatal DNA test? 
  Anyway, as to the original point, it seems kind of rude to assume this is necessary if you're in a committed relationship. >
  
  Right, I will edit to add the part about the non-invasive blood draw. It is not that expensive either (at least in my country) 
  I’m not worried about being “rude”. You know what else is rude? Allowing a man to be emotionally attached to and fiscally responsible for a child that is not his. 
  Would the heartbreak of learning the small person you loved is the product of betrayal not be bad enough? Every child support payment would be salt in the wound. >
  
  You're assuming that said father would reject the child.
  What worries you the most? That a child doesn't share your DNA or that your partner cheated on you?
  Let's say your partner doesn't cheat on you yet your child does not share your genes, would that offend you? In case your might weasel of the question, think about it and ask it as is.
  Or, imagine your partner cheats on you but the child has your genes? Does it offend you less?
  Actually, imagine you had sex with your partner AND you know she cheated on you a few hours later or before.
  And you know she's pregnant. Why would you want to make sure the child has your genes before knowing how you would treat them?
  I would say this has nothing to do with the child but your ego. >
  
  
  What worries you the most? That a child doesn't share your DNA or that your partner cheated on you?
  
  Both bothers me, but the child not sharing my DNA worries me the most
  
  Let's say your partner doesn't cheat on you yet your child does not share your genes
  
  I don't understand how this is possible, can i have a further explanation on this question 
  
  Or, imagine your partner cheats on you but the child has your genes? Does it offend you less?
  
  Does this happen simultaneously? I mean she gets pregnant with my child but keeps cheating on me near the event of the impregnation? 
  I think, yes, i would be more offended if I got cheated on and she got impregnated by another man >
  
  Can I ask why it worries you the most?
  If I learned that my son “isn’t mine”, the marriage would be over, but I’d fight tooth and nail for custody.  
  The love I have for the little guy has nothing to do with genes and DNA.  It is built on the time I spent with him, the sleepless nights I cared for him, all the good memories I have with him. Nothing his mom could have done would ever make me look at him as not my son.
  Him not sharing my genes would be at the very bottom of the list of negative things in that situation. >
  
  
  The love I have for the little guy has nothing to do with genes and DNA. It is built on the time I spent with him, the sleepless nights I cared for him, all the good memories I have with him. Nothing his mom could have done would ever make me look at him as not my son.
  
  I agree with you. You developed a bond so strong that nothing can destroy it.
  If I discover that the kid is not mine before having the bond, I would not want to keep the child. 
  If I discover that the kid is not mine later, i would love him regardless >
  
  That’s fair.  But I’m still curious, if your partner is pregnant and she tells you she cheated on you and the kid isn’t yours, your first concern would be “the kid isn’t mine” above “the person I trusted cheated on me”? >
  
  Let's say she is six months pregnant and tells me "the kid isn't yours", my reaction would be "what? How can the kid not being mine? Oh she cheated on me". My concern is on the cheating. We break up and I move on.
  Let's say we just have our baby, it's been 3 months, and she tells me "the kid isn't yours". I would be devastated because I just lost my kid. 
  Having a kid is important for me, knowing that's not my child little after he's born, would be heart breaking and super devastating >
  
  Thank you, it makes sense. >
  
  Theo feels very location dependent. 
  I know where I live, if you are married within 9 months of the birth your husbands name automatically goes on the birth certificate. A prenatal DNA test would not change that. Even if the actual father is there and willing to sign the birth certificate, be cannot. You still have to take another paternity test post birth to update the birth certificate. >
  
  The chance of taking the wrong bay home are not zero. >
  
  A prenup doesn’t indicate any level of distrust. “Let’s get a prenup so if we ever divorce for any reason we already have stuff mostly taken care of and don’t have to worry about dealing with it in our already difficult and emotional state.” While a paternity test is “you might have cheated on me” maybe there’s nothing wrong with that, but it has implications that a prenup does not, nobody has to be at fault for a prenup to be useful. >
  
  If you ask for a DNA test you're saying "I believe you cheated". It's nothing like a prenup, prenup doesn't accuse you of anything, it's a backup plan for a future no one can predict. 
  How would you feel if your spouse said to your face that he believes you're cheating him and he won't believe you unless you go through a blood test to prove your loyalty? Would that feel good? Is it a sign of a healthy marriage? Do you really wanna encourage that? >
  
  I have nothing to hide. My husband has full access to my phone and location, he is welcome to a dna test if that helps his feelings. 
  My love for my husband is not bigger than my ego. If I can help him to deal with an insecurity or trust me why would I not take those steps??
  Do you love your ego more than your partner? >
  
  Why people always say they have nothing to hide like expecting respect and trust from your partner is automatically a sign of dishonesty? I've never cheated, I've never been even tempted to cheat on anyone. I'm probably the most loyal person my future spouse will ever meet, but if he decides to spit false accusations on my face (doesn't matter if there's a pregnancy involved or not) that's not gonna end well.
  If my partner can't see who I am, there's a huge problem in the relationship. If there isn't trust, why the F would I wanna cherish a marriage like that? >
  
  1) this post isn’t about “spitting accusations”. There are LOTS of babies who aren’t conceived within the vows of marriage. There are a lot of kids who are born to parents who hardly know each other or are in marriages where one spouse thinks they are happy and the other doesn’t. 
  On this note - I’m monogamous with my husband. When I go to the gyno they still do a swab for sti’s when they do my pap. 
  Why?? Because living my spouse and being faithful to him and TRUSTING him are NOT bigger than some things. My health is included in that. To get yourself tested for STI’s is the same ‘accusation’ as you’d call it that someone in my marriage is unfaithful. 
  But the results that I get are EXACTLY what I expect and that hurts NO ONE. 
  2) it was very clearly stated in my marriage vows to my husband that if he had any doubts or anxieties or worries that he could come to me calmly (not in an accusation as you would bitterly call it) and I would do everything I could to calm his heart. That is my job as a living wife. IF the pat test is brought up calmly from a place of anxiety from a husband to a wife and she gets mean and defensive in response, well then I’d say she needs to cool her tits. I would move mountains to reassure my husband and if he needs written DNA proof that a child is his it is not my job as a living wife to be butt hurt about that but instead to supply him with the tools to calm his nerves. I am not a defensive partner to my husband. 
  Maybe I’m less emotional than some people, and that’s fine. But just because I would be okay with this in my marriage doesn’t mean you get to take defence about it. That’s NOT what this CMV post is about. Frankly I don’t care about your opinions on what I would be willing to do in my marriage because your hot take doesn’t matter. >
  
  STI panels are optional and it’s also a test you’re choosing to get performed on yourself. You’re suggesting that men should have a right to require women to get unnecessary medical testing and they shouldn’t be offended if they have nothing to hide. It doesn’t matter how noninvasive prenatal paternity testing is now, that decision is only for the pregnant person to make. >
  
  You think publicly declaring that you don't trust your wife is good for a marriage?
  You don't see how that would undermine the foundations and create resentment and distrust.
  Look at 80% of the relationship advice reddits.    It's always "Girlfriend, If he's accusing you of cheating that means HE's the one who's actually cheating and projecting!  You need to go out and get yourself some dick to make him pay!   If you're gonna do the time, you might as well do the crime!" >
  
  THIS ISNT ABOUT MARRIAGE! 
  This is about knowing the fact of paternity. Whether the child’s parents are husband/wife or casual sex friends. The bio dad has the right to know their child and an imposter should not be held responsible just because of their interactions with the mother. 
  If you think that 100% of babies are a planned conception you are delusional. >
  
  So, you're seriously going to go with having children and demanding proof that your wife has been faithful has nothing whatsoever to do with marriage?
  Seriously?
  "I demand that you take a test to prove that's not another man's baby, but IT ISN'T ABOUT OUR MARRAIGE!!!!!"
  Have you ever been married? >
  
  ….I am the wife? 
  There are lots of marriages out there that aren’t very good. 
  Let me take a step back to say: this is not a core belief of mine. I had time over lunch and wanted a debate. Y’all can calm down now. >
  
  And the men in those marriages are perfectly free to order DNA tests. Why the hell should expensive, non-medically necessary medical tests be routinely performed because some marriages suck?
  Some husbands commit murder-suicide. It has fuck-all to do with my marriage. >
  
  I never had a prenup with my ex-wife, or paternity tests for the children I had with her, and I can't think of a single reason why I would have wanted to have either, even after we divorced.
  When we married, I owned less than $10k in assets, similar for her, so there was really nothing to be protected by a prenup. It would have been a waste of time and money.
  When we had children (or when she had children) I had no desire not to be the legal father. What benefit could have come from a paternity test? I would have signed my name to the birth certificate regardless of the result.
  You're right that prenups and paternity tests should be an option for people who want them. But they already are. >
  
  I guess my point is that the stigma should be taken away. Prenups are seen as a tool for men to hide assets. This is not true (if you do it right). 
  Paternity tests are not “about trust” to me - they are a tool to protect the one parent who does not have physical proof of it being their kid. Why people get so upset over it is beyond me. If you have nothing to hide then why are they so flighty? 
  Also, I do believe if your ex made children without consent (failed birth control/lied) that you shouldn’t be liable for them - that is sexual/reproductive coercion  and should be considered equal to r*pe or sexual harassment. >
  
  It is beyond you why people get upset about it, really? 
  Asking for a prenatal paternity is asking for proof that the woman didn’t cheat. You really can’t see why someone might get upset by that, why for many people it very much is about trust? >
  
  Actually paternity testing cannot prove she didn't cheat. If she cheated but used birth control carefully during the affair, it could still be her husband's baby.
  The only thing the test proves is that the child is biologically the putative father's. >
  
  If you think there is a possibility your partner is cheating on you, why be with them? You shouldn't be paying for a dna test you should be paying for a therapist to deal with your trust issues. >
  
  The point is that is why prenups exist as well. Pretty easy to say “why don’t you trust me” when one side doesn’t have any need for trust, they have proof. If someone wanted a dna test by default why not? >
  
  Prenups are a mutual agreement where partners choose what happens not only after divorce, but also during the marriage and in case of death. Paternity tests have only one use, and it is to determine the biological father (in this case to see if the partner cheated or not). When somebody asks you to do so, that's the only possible explanation is that they think you cheated. Will they ask to do it for the second child too? The third? The fourth? That is not the person I would want to be married to. >
  
  Prenups that dictate terms of the relationship moving forward are extremely rare and almost useless in court. 
  Prenups are entirely useless for the 95 percent of marriages between people who don't have premarital assets. >
  
  The assumption in all of this is that the parents won't be together, the father won't want equal custody, and to boot will be mad about supporting a child they raised because it's not biologically linked.
  Those are not normal things. >
  
  Its completely normal to get a divorce over your wife cheating on you, and getting pregnant from the guy she cheated on you with, and pretending that it is your child. 
  Now, what you said is generally true when a father finds out several years after the child is born; Whether or not the child is biologically theirs, they have developed a relationship with that child. It is their Son/Daughter from the same perspective that a step father who comes in at birth is the parent of the child. Its nearly the same thing.
  But having a paternity test done on the day of birth and finding out its not your kid shortly after the birth is a whole different beast. >
  
  If we were living in an ideal world where every father accepts financial responsibility for their child, it would be much less of an issue.   
  However, in reality, a lot of men just do not pay child support, and making a paternity test will not automatically lead to transferring responsibility for an assumed father to a biological father, and the ones who will be hurt the most will be children. >
  
  Why should you pay for your cheating wife's kid ? She decided to cheat and had a kid out of that, she and the biological father should pay for the kid. You should not pay for other people mistakes >
  
  Spoiler alert: I did in fact need the disclaimer >
  
  Where do you suppose your trust issues stem from?
  Cheating partner in the past?
  Parents unfaithful?
  DNA test kits revealing some family secrets? >
  
  I don’t have trust issues! And yes, I am in therapy. 
  Think of it this way. Your wife who you loved cheated. That is bad X 100. Then you realize your kid might not be yours?! Heart break city. And on top of that you are fiscally responsible for that child forever. Even if his bio dad is in the picture. 
  It is the same as a prenup - that’s the change my view. Protect your assets. 
  A simple prenatal blood draw will clear up any confusion at all. Or a cheek swab at the hospital can prevent a baby-swap tragedy. >
  
  
  Think of it this way. Your wife who you loved cheated. That is bad X 100. Then you realize your kid might not be yours?! Heart break city.
  
  How often does this series of events happen?
  It's MGTOW hysteria that women are cheating, scheming, money-hungry whatever.
  Also, your kid is your kid. Someone  abandons a kid they raised and loved because they're not biologically related, they're an unequivocal piece of crap.