Archive for Saturday, February 12, 2011

Bill in Kansas House would require paternity testing for every Kansas newborn

February 12, 2011

Advertisement

On the street

Do you think newborns in the state should be genetically tested to identify the child’s father?

No, I don’t. I don’t really have a reason, I just think it’s unnecessary.

More responses

— A bill introduced in the Kansas House would require every newborn in the state to be genetically tested to identify the child's father.

State Rep. Melody McCray Miller, a Democrat from Wichita, says the bill is intended to help men who have been named as a child's father, or who want to know if they are the child's father. The bill would also apply to married couples who have several children.

The bill says a court could intervene if someone refused to take the test or have it administered to the baby.

McCray told The Hutchinson News that the cost of the tests would not be added to the hospital bill, but she didn't know the financial impact of the legislation.

Comments

mom_of_three 4 years, 5 months ago

paternity testing - You have got to be joking. And she doesnt even know the financial impact.

rbwaa 4 years, 5 months ago

maybe Maury could do all the testing for Kansas and develop a new show format...

Ralph Reed 4 years, 5 months ago

You have got to be kidding. It's a joke, right? If it's not, I guess all the nut cases aren't Republican legislators.

deec 4 years, 5 months ago

The last one out of Kansas, please turn off the lights.

overthemoon 4 years, 5 months ago

Oh. I thought all the nasty liberals were dirty old hippies and slackers and lazy good-for-nothings. We've be upgraded to wine and Volvos? Cool! Guess that means we work for a living and enjoy the finer things in life like art and music and knowing that if there are still those who suffer, we have the means to help them. I feel so much better now.

ksarmychick 4 years, 5 months ago

Our men and women fighting for our freedom are required to give the government a DNA sample upon enlisting. Along with a full set of fingerprints and urine sample for drug testing.
Kinda funny when people use the excuse of the military fighting for their freedom as why they shouldn't have to do something, especially when the soldiers have already forfitted the rights the citizens are complaining about when they enlisted.

JayCat_67 4 years, 5 months ago

True, but no one forced us to enlist. (and I mean that as a positive). And on a side note, the fact that you were actually able to decipher that post puts you a couple steps ahead of me :-)

overthemoon 4 years, 5 months ago

And somebody's forcing somebody to father a baby?

Steve Jacob 4 years, 5 months ago

I like the intent anyway. We all know there are hundreds if not thousands of men in Kansas who's paying child support or raising children they think is their's.

tomatogrower 4 years, 5 months ago

And who probably are theirs. No apostrophe needed.

Richard Heckler 4 years, 5 months ago

"The bill would also apply to married couples who have several children."

Why?

somebodynew 4 years, 5 months ago

Well, while there are several problems with this bill, one that noone has pointed out is a biggie - You can test all the babies you want, but if you don't test the fathers all you have is a data base for "future testing". Pretty scary. Somehow, I don't think "dead bears" are just going to voluteer to be tested when ever their "baby momma" goes in to have the child.

So who controls this big database, and who pays for it ?????

rbwaa 4 years, 5 months ago

and, what penalty would be imposed if the test was refused by either the father or mother? that, in itself, should cost a bundle in addition to the cost of testing...i doubt, or hope, any other legislator would take this bill seriously

Stuart Evans 4 years, 5 months ago

I'm certain that dead bears will never volunteer to be tested or anything else.

conservative 4 years, 5 months ago

Merril I would assume her reasoning is because if a man is married to the mother and listed on the birth certificate it is next to impossible for him to not be held responsible for child support later even if it is proven she cheated and he is not the biological father. Still seems like a large waste of resources for the potential fixes it might provide. Better to just rewrite the laws governing child support if that is the problem she is trying to address.

Bob_Keeshan 4 years, 5 months ago

I don't see this as any more ridiculous than requiring a birth certificate from an 85 year old woman who has lived in Kansas her whole life but wants to vote in a new county.

ivalueamerica 4 years, 5 months ago

Imagine the possibilities if the state kept genetic profiles of all citizens.

Thank you GOP for keeping government intrusion to a minimum.

Amy Heeter 4 years, 5 months ago

What this will do is simplify testing if needed in court matters. Since mom and children's dna will already be in the data base. This Will aid the state in establishing paternity later as needed. I do feel that if the man is there at the birth and signs the birth certificate this is a indication he is the father. Although I know of a few loser men that.have tried this in divorce cases. If they are true deadbeats it really won't aid in collection of support.

Aileen Dingus 4 years, 5 months ago

I'm astounded. What a stupid, unnecessary idea. Especially the part about "The bill would also apply to married couples who have several children." All this bill does is accuse women of messing around.

Brent Garner 4 years, 5 months ago

Am checking the calendar. Thought this was 2011 not 1984. Now I'm not so certain.

seriouscat 4 years, 5 months ago

Clearly State Rep. Melody McCray Miller, a Democrat from Wichita, has mommy issues.

bolshavik_vw 4 years, 5 months ago

Yes they should. There is an old saying. "When you play, you should pay." And there are too many babies born out there out of those circiumstances. It is sad to see how many kids out there grow up without the support of their parents. And if the fathers, or Sperm Dispensers, do not wish to take responsiblity and pay up. Garnishing wages, do not work, they can always go get another job. Most of them do not have current registartion or Insurence for their Automobiles, or is their Driver License any good. So putting restrictions on their driving privilages won't work either, I say just put them in Jail. Let them have work release, and also garnish their wages while they are in Jail. People may say why do this so we can support them? Well if they took responsiblity for the life they helped create, Then this would not have to be the result.

tomatogrower 4 years, 5 months ago

This is only one of the stupid bills being considered by the state legislature. We should have a vote on which one is the most stupid. We could call it the "Duh awards". We could have a big party in Topeka and invite the legislators. Mind boggling.

walkthehawk 4 years, 5 months ago

same as last year . . . nothing like principled leadership in the face of crisis.

kernal 4 years, 5 months ago

Seeing as we live in Kansas and provide the nation with much head shaking and guffaws, it's high time we have an annual Dumba## of Kansas Award! We're only into February and we already have two strong contenders.

verity 4 years, 5 months ago

How about a top 10? At the very least. One would just not be enough.

Alfred_W 4 years, 5 months ago

kernal said: "it's high time we have an annual Dumba## of Kansas Award!"

I believe we all voted on that last November...

MyName 4 years, 5 months ago

Wow, how do people like this get elected? There is no way that this is cost effective. DNA testing isn't 100% accurate the first time around. Also, and most importantly: if it turns out that "your daddy ain't your daddy, but your daddy don't know", do we really want that to come up in a paternity test shortly before or after the child's birth? Can you think of a worse time?

Cait McKnelly 4 years, 5 months ago

"A bill introduced in the Kansas House would require every newborn in the state to be genetically tested to identify the child's father." 1. Fathers cannot be determined if there is no one to get DNA from to do a comparison. 2. No one can be legally compelled to surrender their DNA without probable cause. 3. Where will the data bank be stored, how will it be maintained and for what purpose (given that once the father has been determined there is no longer any reason to maintain it). Good luck with this. As in most legislation I see coming out of Kansas these days, this is another one that has "SCOTUS" written all over it. It truly amazes me that a state government that continually whines, cries, pisses and moans about how broke we are seems to have no problem pumping out frivolous, "issue" oriented legislation that will do nothing but cost this state money.

justmytwocents 4 years, 5 months ago

no. What if a woman does not list a father on the birth certificate? Would they just hold the dna until a man stepped up?
the implications here are astronomical. Test every baby because women have been known to sleep around?
Just see no reason for it what so ever.

pace 4 years, 5 months ago

Could insurance companies come in and block populations from being insured, data once collected can not be assumed not to be of vested interest.

pace 4 years, 5 months ago

It is such a bad idea I see the Republicans running with it, giving it all to the democrat proposing it. Showing bipartisanship.

alsoagrandma 4 years, 5 months ago

Isn't this the same woman who is voting against Obamacare because we shouldn't be forced to purchase health care insurance?. Her agenda isn't consistent. I am concerned when any DNA is mandatory with the court intervening if tests are refused. Before WWII eugenics were practiced in America.

downandout 4 years, 5 months ago

Lol, all of the women reacting negatively to this must be nervous.

What are you ladies hiding?

JayCat_67 4 years, 5 months ago

It's discrimination, I tell you. I couldn't possibly support this bill unless the mothers have to get tested too!

Ralph Reed 4 years, 5 months ago

@JayCat_67. re: your 1312.

Why, to make sure she's the mother of her children? Don't tell that to Miller, she'll want your suggestion added in.

@all.p>@all.>

Just realized where Miller is from. Kinda expect something like this out of Wichita.

Richard Payton 4 years, 5 months ago

She made a little ole' but wanted the caddy instead of the daddy! She told the caddy he was the daddy because she was messing around on the poor daddy. Now pops out DNA ole'.

guesswho 4 years, 5 months ago

Wow!

Is the state going to pay for this? Talk about privacy concerns.

My understanding is this - the person who is listed as the father on the birth certificate is the father (legally). Requiring the father to submit a DNA sample is problematic in so many ways.

Also, what if the father died after conception but before birth? Or the dad is serving in the war overseas. Um..fedex some spit over here, please?

verity 4 years, 5 months ago

Why can't a DNA test be done at the point that a question comes up? Isn't the DNA always going to be there and not change?

Then there are all the kinds of fertility treatments that use other people's eggs or sperm. Sure hope that sperm wasn't cuckolded.

I just don't see the point of this law, which, as other people have said, is very problematic in terms of privacy. Yes, I'm sure there are unsuspecting husbands who believe they are the father when they're not, but I'm not sure it is a function of the state to find out if they have been cheated on.

On the other hand, what happens if there is a mistake---which there will be---and the couple, at a time that should be one of the happiest moments of their lives, has this thrown at them? What damage will be done while they are waiting for a second test?

This just has really bad idea written all over it and I have no doubt that many would refuse the test for a number of reasons. If it passes---and since it's been proposed by a Democrat, maybe the Republicans will automatically vote against it---it will not only cost money to enforce, it will cost money to defend in court.

Julie Craig 4 years, 5 months ago

One way to create new jobs. Ok - just joking.

This is what our legislators are focusing on instead of the massive deficit and unemployment? Geez

weeslicket 4 years, 5 months ago

because conservative republicans have owned this state for decades?

maybe the fault lies with all those kansas rinos.

please keep playing along.

jellybeanies 4 years, 5 months ago

This is a huge invasion of privacy. There are many men that choose to be a father whether they are the biological father or not. Some people just don't want to know and they have their own reasons. Are we really going to force people to know if they wish to remain ignorant of that information? If someone wants to know, they can pay for it privately. Again, this is the State trying to poke their head under other people's bed sheets.

evilpenguin 4 years, 5 months ago

Wow, what a disgusting and terrible idea. I don't even have kids but this idea makes me so mad! If my husband and I have kids, they will be our children, we won't need the government telling us that they belong to the two of us.

I agree with paternity testing if the father's identity is in question and he's being told to pay child support, but testing every baby that's born is ludicrous! Surely regular people can police themselves without having the state do it for them?

If the baby were the product of a rape, by all means test the baby WITH THE MOTHERS CONSENT, but nobody should be forced to have science show what they already know. Jeez Kansas, get a clue!

pace 4 years, 5 months ago

They could test every driver for drugs and alcohol Test the mothers, avoid the underestimated mixed up baby in the hospital.Check the grandparents, if possible go back dig some of them up, let's get it all straight. Everyone should have blood, dna, and bodily fluid for illness, drugs, everything, every week. Hang the expense.

gl0ckUser 4 years, 5 months ago

Yes lets test new borns and get their DNA into the KBI system so that we can reference them later if there is a crime.........

I see alot of ppl Doing home births in the Near future !

PennyBrite 4 years, 5 months ago

you got that right. or going across the state line to deliver your baby. I don't trust the government to have my baby's DNA on record for whatever they "may" want it for later on. Other than paternity, what all can they tell from DNA?

weeslicket 4 years, 5 months ago

here's my question: is there a tax upon this requirement?

oops..... didn't mean to offend the no-tax, get the government off my shoulders crowd. what i really meant to ask: is there a government fee for this service?

Ron Holzwarth 4 years, 5 months ago

Shouldn't be any more than the cost of the test, which is about $70 - $100.

weeslicket 4 years, 5 months ago

how much of that $70-100 goes to the state government that is no/low tax/fee, and also not a bedroom nanny? or is that $100-130 for my mostly non-intrusive caretakers?

pat2000 4 years, 5 months ago

no one here is mentioning the elephant in the room. the problem here is that mandatory paternity testing would take something away from women (the freedom to choose who gets to pay for her child), and giving something to men (protection against paternity fraud). women have always had the freedom to chose who to pin paternity on, and they don't want to give that up. they see that as unfair.

of the over-the-counter paternity tests, 30% of the results come back 'you are NOT the father!'. can you imagine the effect this would have on society and relationships if this dark truth is forced into the light? devastation!

weeslicket 4 years, 5 months ago

elephants in the room? in kansas?

i really don't know whether the lights will be turned on, or left off, in our state. (i really should ask by bedroom nanny. but then, she always tells me to keep the lights off.)

Commenting has been disabled for this item.