Who's ya Daddy!

I believe that all babies should be paternity tested at birth, by law.
That would solve many heartaches later in life, for all parties concerned.
There is an acknowledged percentage of kids out there who are not the child of the man on their birth certificate, although the precise % is disputed they do exist, that fact is not disputed.
I cannot see any valid reason why a mother could possibly object, unless she has something to hide?
It's not a matter of trust, if it's the standard then no-one can be accused of that, and it would prevent any later shock-horror revelations, which unfortunately happen all too often.
What has anyone got to lose that they haven't already put at risk anyway?
Thoughts?

If a majority of people feel that this would be a violation of trust and privacy ("Why not just take my word for it?" ), then it would be a violation to impose such a law.

Otherwise I don't see a problem with it, except for the potentially significant extra cost of performing such tests.

Instead of plugging in my newborn into a centralized data-system, what if civil society was promoted independently of law-enforcers and law makers?

I like the idea that I'm more or less responsible for the success of my family. It seems to me that for several decades the west has been on the march of trying to remove "government from our bedrooms" and "whatever happens between consenting adults" blah blah.

And now we can't seem to shore up the mess from free-flowing havoc without government intervention. Is that it? Do we really think another law or another program will help organize people's sex-lives?

The costs of testing, like everything else new, are dropping even now, given the economies of scale if hey were a mandated procedure they would drop even further faster.
The will of the majority actually carries little real weight in Government programs ,you need only see all the unpopular laws etc that are enacted every year to understand that.

I don't really understand the gist of your response but will answer what I can.
I don't see this as the gov' interfering in our bedrooms, only establishing the facts about paternity, surely a desirable outcome?
It wouldn't, couldn't, affect what we choose to do, it can only expose infidelity at the very worst, and I personally have no problem with that at all, do you?
As for "consenting adults", do you really believe that a man raising another's child believing it to be his own is consenting?
I certainly don't.
I did make exactly that choice, knowingly and willingly, joyfully even, but it was by my choice, whereas there are many thousands of men out there doing so as the result of deception, and to my mind that is an unacceptable state of affairs, and one that's easily rectifiable these days.
Have you ever watched what it does to a man when that deception is revealed later in life, what it does to the poor child, to all the rest of the family?
I have, and more than once, it's traumatic at the very least, shattering families and lives, and once very nearly lead to death.
Surely it would be better to eliminate that horrific potential if we can, and can do so very quickly and simply these days?
The only person who would possibly suffer then is the mother, and because of her infidelity and deception she has only herself to blame.
Seems fair to me.

The most common objection to this idea from women I've discussed this with is that it's an infringement of their civil liberties, but they can't readily answer when I then ask the obvious question..
Exactly which "liberty" is that?
The liberty to be untrustworthy?
The liberty to deceive the man?
At what point do a woman's "rights" cancel out a man's, or a child's?

I think it's a good idea,I read a story in the paper a while ago where a young woman told her boyfriend she was pregnant,so he asked her to marry him (trying to do the right thing),she refused to.
After the baby was born,she wouldn't let him see it,yet took him to the Family Law Courts,and judged to make him pay maintenance,he ended up selling just about everything he had to give her money,including his car that he needed to get to work.
The long and short of this is,she still refused him access to the child after a year and he ended up taking her to court to find out if the child was his....it wasn't....yet when he took her to court trying to get the money back he'd given her,the courts ruled against it,claiming hardship of an unmarried mother,now that's justice for you.


Testing right up front should be mandatory,there are far to many children out there whose father isn't their father at all,the law will justify making this person pay up,yet the real father gets away with it scott free.
I believe there are quite a few things that should be mandatory in this world,like finding out if you are a suitable person to become a parent before having kids,let's face it some parents just plain aren't fit to be parents.

A child that adores and looks up to or depends on me is my child regardless of blood.

Not meaning I'd run off with them to Abla-Dabi insisting I helped birth them but rather meaning that I would treat them no less than my own blood.

EB,there are many men out there with balls big enough to be able to do that,my son is one of them,but for every bloke who can ,there would be just as many if not more who couldn't/can't/won't.