Did you guys read Ann Landers today? Not about us or our situations but about paternity testing and "fatherhood".<P>Lynne Z. Gold-Bikin Member of family law section of bar association.<P>Says father isn't sperm donor rather the guy who diapers and burps baby.<P>No testing should be done beyond 6 mos. Never after 2 yrs.<P>Great little piece. Hope you all see it or find it on line!<P> Debi<P>------------------<BR>Imagine....

Great article. I wonder if we could get in touch with this lawyer.<BR>In case some of you can't find it I am posting the good part.<BR>****I am the former chair of the American Bar Association -- Family Law Section, and in my 25 years of practice, I have handled close to 15,000 custody cases. DNA testing should not be permitted on children over 6 months of age. This man is her father, whether or not he is biologically related. The definition of "father" encompasses far more than just contributing the "seed." The Uniform Laws Commission has indicated that DNA testing to determine parentage should never be performed on children over 2 years of age. The name on the birth certificate, the man who has burped and diapered the child, is the father. Enough is enough<BR>-- Lynne Z. Gold-Bikin, Norristown, Pa.***<P>Jtigger<p>[This message has been edited by Jtigger (edited February 12, 2001).]

If this is the way a law journal states things, why isn't this the law. Now that I think about it, I think that is why there was a rush to get my h tested. because it was like three weeks before the oc 2nd birthday. Isn't life grand.<P>babstr.

OC was 25 months in our case.<BR>I'm telling you, we need to find this lawyer.<P>Jtigger

I found her using Yahoo People Search.<BR>I think I will send her a letter.<P>Jtigger

axiously awaiting the attorny's response. let us know.<P><P>------------------<BR>Zebra Baby ...<P>Lord, give me the serinity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

jtigger,OMG you women here are so great! Let me know when she answers or point her to us for 1 day of questions.<P>Hey,she's in Pa. ... does that matter?<P>I wish ow would see that letter. Maybe she'd go back to her H and leave us alone after C is born..... but I doubt it.<P> Debi<P>------------------<BR>Imagine....

The OC was almost 12 in our case, and a complete surprise. So, unfortunately the two year window for DNA testing is not law.

<BR>Appeals to "burping and diapering" are a rhetorical technique known as pathos, or more directly, appealing to emotion rather than fact. As the author is an attorney I am certain she is well aware of what she is doing in her essay. And specifically, she is knowingly and intentionally excluding an entire class of potential litigants with a valid right to establish paternity beyond six months, age two, or any age. Men who are defrauded about paternity by their wives have a moral right to deny paternity. Obviously, Gold-Bikin wants to codify the ability of women to cuckold men, to force unwitting men to pay child support for the offspring of a wife's affair. Her position is neither sensical nor fair. In fact, I find her position sick. Violating a man's right to <I>informed consent</I> will never be justified through appeals to "burping and diapering." I strongly disagree with her, as do a growing number of state legislatures. <P>Bystander

I didn't post on this when it first came up because I, too, disagree. I have to agree with bystander that it is important to establish a man's right to informed consent.<P>As it is, women are far too able to manipulate men regarding pregnancy. As I have said before, a man's reporductive rights are severely limited as compared to a woman's. A man cannot, under any circumstances, insist that a pregnancy he took part in causing be terminated, nor are there inherent fatherhood rights in place once said child is born. If a woman lies about being infertile in order to trap a man into producing a pregnancy with the intent to force him to remained tied to the mother and child, either emotionally or financially, the man has no means by which to dissolve the paternal obligations on grounds that he did not consent to the pregnancy. A couple of years ago the Alliance for Non-Custodial Parents Rights (ANCPR) tried to assist a man in suing a woman because she told him she was on the pill and became impregnated. the argument was that she used his reproductive abilities (ie., sperm) without his consent and therefore he should not be held liable for the results. I understand that this was shot down, due to the fact that men do not have full rights at this time to informed consent.<P>What this attourney is doing here is trying to trick you by putting the horse in front of the cart, so to speak, into believing that this stance would be beneficial to cases like ours, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. If men had the power to make decisions about their ability to reproduce, few of us today would be in the positions we are in. As it stands, the law says that if a man consents to sex, he automatically consents to parenthood. A woman, on the other hand, has the right to choose not only whom she will become sexually involved with, but whether or not she wants to reproduce. All of this without needing to obtain the man's consent. This lawyer is trying to make you believe that laws like this would get you out of the mess your in, when in fact similar laws got you here in the first place. <BR>You'll notice that she doesn't say, "If a man DOESN'T 'burp and diaper', then in fact he is NOT the father." She leads you to believe that this is what she intended, but clearly it isn't. And what of cases in which nobody but ow does the burping and diapering? Do you think she'd let our husbands off the hook then? no way. Like Bystander said, she clearly has an agenda, and it sure isn't helping us.<P>The lack of informed consent, ladies and gents, is the true discrimination. do not allow yourselves to be mislead. any laws that take away a man's freedom to choose hurt all of us in the long run.<P>-cd<P>[This message has been edited by cdcollins (edited February 13, 2001).]<p>[This message has been edited by cdcollins (edited February 13, 2001).]

cd, well said my h ordeal was just what happened in the case you were talking about. I asked the little nasty how she got preg when she was on the pill. She said she had to quit taking it because of med reasons. She went off it in Dec got knocked up in Jan. What I could never understand what med reasons would there possibly be that you cant take the pill but yet you can let yourself get preg. She has herpes would that be a reason to go off the pill and risk a baby being born with it. She told my h the kid had a big chance of being born with it he handed her the money to abort but she wouldnt.That was another gift she tried to give him luckly he had enough brains to go get blood test done on himself imediatly. I think I would have killed him if he would have gave that to me. The only med reason I could ever come up with was mental Illness thinking you can get preg to get a man. Do you know of any med reason to go off the pill? I was on it for 15 years only time I went off it was when I wanted to get preg. with love flowerseed

Dear Flowerseed, provider of my daily chuckle,<P>yes i can think of one disease: chronic sluttyitis. Symptoms of said condition include, but are not limited to: extreme selfishness, coveting of other people's possessions, promiscuity, and low mental capacity. Other signs of this disease, which is on the verge of becoming a nationwide epidemic, may include warping of soul, clear delusions of granduer, and the inability to disappear into the woodwork.<P>Hope my foray into the medical journals helped.<P>in my case the sluttyities patient claimed that she was infertile due to endometriosis, and for other reasons was unable to carry a child to full term as it would cause permanent total paralysis. To date, there is no wheelchair in sight. Sigh...<P>With love, Donna

cd, ah yes chronic sluttyitis thats got to be it. Thanks for the laugh. with love flowerseed

cd and flower,<P>You two crack me up! That has to be one of the funniest things I have heard, chronic sluttiytis, I think I spelled it wrong, but very amusing. <P>babstr.

Girls and just think our mission is to educate and free the world of this dreaded illness. with love flowerseed

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>yes i can think of one disease: chronic sluttyitis. Symptoms of said condition include, but are not limited to: extreme selfishness, coveting of other people's possessions, promiscuity, and low mental capacity. Other signs of this disease, which is on the verge of becoming a nationwide epidemic, may include warping of soul, clear delusions of granduer, and the inability to disappear into the woodwork<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P><BR>The last line is what happened in H case cd.<P>It was the "pity" lay that she claims to be pregnant by.<P>She also "switched" pills mid-cycle because her pill was making her sick.<P>Don't forget she WAS my friend and that is a bunch of bull.<P>She had been on that pill since her 6 yr old D was born! It was fine till H couldn't take her blackmailing him anymore! She went off and BINGO attachment for life!!!!!<P>She blackmailed him for almost a year.He did it once and she swore to tell. He put her off for a month or two at a time until he couldn't perform for her or me from stress!<P>I thought it was his job and $ problems!<P>He's told me so many things.<P>So has our counsler.<P>H cannot forgive himself for letting her control him for so long. And now the shi* hasn't even hit the fan yet.<P>Counsler said she has the money to keep H in courts for years over nothing cuz she has the time too. <P>Sure hope it's not his.....ugh...<P> Debi<P>------------------<BR>Imagine....

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cdcollins:<BR>[B]<P>What this attourney is doing here is trying to trick you by putting the horse in front of the cart, so to speak, into believing that this stance would be beneficial to cases like ours, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth. If men had the power to make decisions about their ability to reproduce, few of us today would be in the positions we are in. As it stands, the law says that if a man consents to sex, he automatically consents to parenthood. A woman, on the other hand, has the right to choose not only whom she will become sexually involved with, but whether or not she wants to reproduce. All of this without needing to obtain the man's consent. This lawyer is trying to make you believe that laws like this would get you out of the mess your in, when in fact similar laws got you here in the first place. B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Pay attention, Ladies and Gentlemen. It has been so easy for the Big Government liberals to change policy and laws with their agenda for the express purpose of gaining access to your bank account and pick your pockets on behalf of the "poor defenseless children". Watch for clever wording and big campaigns designed to manipulate your emotions (guilt) with their very, very vocal, radical and militant crusades. The Ann Landers piece is an excellent example of the nose of the camel getting into the tent.<P>Catnip =^^=<P>

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by cdcollins:<BR><B>chronic sluttyitis. Symptoms of said condition include, but are not limited to: extreme selfishness, coveting of other people's possessions, promiscuity, and low mental capacity. Other signs of this disease, which is on the verge of becoming a nationwide epidemic, may include warping of soul, clear delusions of granduer, and the inability to disappear into the woodwork.</B><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><P>Hahahahahaha, cd. You brought down the house!<P>The malady you described could also be "phuckatakenmanitis" complicated with a severe case of "seekmealticket" disorder. This hits women in their mid-thirties who are prone to sleeping past 11 AM each day, followed by hours spent watching Jerry Springer, desperately seeking ways to stay unemployed by setting up married men who appear to have money, deliberately getting pregnant, thus insuring a huge monthly payment. Often these women feign ignorance of how not to conceive in an attempt to gain sympathy. It's a terrible disease and the government has implemented an aggressive program to fund these poor souls and their pawn, I mean spawn. They mandate your income be routed from your pocket to hers, thus providing her ample funds to maintain the lifestyle she never had before while you struggle and do without.<P>That was fun.<P>Catnip =^^=<P><p>[This message has been edited by catnip (edited February 13, 2001).]