Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Hopping
Obtaining DNA for paternity purposes is painless and non-invasive,and doesn't compromise childrens' rights to support from the actual father.It is instead a completely reliable legal device to detect maternal fraud.The purpose of a legal action is to determine the facts,not how people feel.
It bears repeating that a dissolution of marriage is not sitting around the campfire holding hands and singing "Kumbaya".It's really much more like Hiroshima,and if Telecaster69 is in a dissolution,he needs not to be singing about "turning Japanese".
It also bears repeating that making nice is much more appropriately done AFTER you've won.
|
I stand by my post 100%. You take your child to take this paternity test and all you're saying is "I never cared for you that much anyway." Who cares if the test is "painless" and "non-invasive"? You're going to do that kind of damage to a child and for what? For money? Besides, a court will look at the relationship between the father and child before the biology in making any decision anyway. A judge would most likely take the result of that test and completely disregard it.
You've set up this false choice between "Kumbaya" and "Hiroshima" while disregarding the entire continuum of other options available. Yours has to be the worst advice I've seen given in a long, long time.