Conference quark::mennotes-v1

    I'm not at all expert on this, but my understanding is that you can
    sometimes prove someone is NOT the father, but that you can never
    prove that someone IS the father.  So the best you can hope for in your
    case is bad news.  
    						- Vick

    i have the impression that with some recent advances in DNA type work
    that absolute certainty is now possible. (e.g. carries over into -or was
    started by don't know which- determining who belongs to the sperm found
    on the person of a rape victim.
    
    				herb

    With DNS testing they can find out with about 90=% accuracy whether or
    not the child and her father arte related.  However, I would recommend
    seeing both a lawyer and a good counselor before proceding.  some
    things may be better left unknown at times.  
    
    One aside and possible rathole.  Is he unwilling to pay support to his
    own child?

    Rathole alart! 
    
    >Is he unwilling to pay support to his own child?
    
    Did you not read the base note? He believes that the child is not his.
    I can understand that. I can understand that the base noter is in a
    tuff call. On one side, if the child is his, he pays. On the other
    side, if the child is not his bio, he hurts the child emotionly. Either
    way he is between the rock and a hard place. A child that may not have
    seen her true bio father since birth. Give the kid a real complex. And 
    agian, the ex postures the child as a pawn to play agianst the father.
    If he doesn't pay because he isn't your dad. He is a rat. And if he
    pays, it can hurt him and his second SO financially. For the court
    systems, claim that they are looking at dads wadge. But really take
    into account both incomes in many states. Rocks and hard places. Rocks
    and children who are the victums agian.
    
    Peace

    To answer the question put forth in .0, all three parties - mother, 
    "father", and child - have to participate in the paternity *blood* test.  
    And it can only tell the "father" if he's NOT the father, not if he IS.
    
    However, with newer fangled DNA testing, perhaps this is not so.
    
    How reliable is the source that provided the "information"?  I think
    that should be something to consider before pursuing the matter
    further. 
    
    **Debs
            

    .3
    
    At one time he was paying child support but discovered the money was
    being used to purchase new wardrobe and pay past debts of the mother,
    so he begain purchasing everything himself and handing it over.
    
    
    .5
    The source is extremely reliable.

    	The latest genetic typing I have read about may give a result
    without a sample from the mother. It may give a definite NO. It may
    give a YES with a fairly high probability. It may give a MAYBE.
    Obviously if your husband has an identical twin there is no way it can
    tell which of the two produced the daughter.
    
    	If a sample from the mother is also available it removes most of
    the MAYBE cases and gives a much higher certainty if the answer is YES.

    
    With the new testing (a friend has just done it last month) they
    only test baby and father. The chances of is being the father
    is 90 to 90+%, even with an identical twin the new test can be
    much more acurate than in the past. 
    
    Good Luck with the emotional side tho....
    
    

DNA testing is now able to establish with ALMOST absolute certainty a
person's own identity; i.e., is this person we have arrested the same
person who left behing traces of hair on an alleged victim?

DNA testing does not identify every specific base pair in a person's
DNA.  It observes chemical patterns and their locations.  The most
desirable genetic material comes from hair, because hair is dead and
is therefore more stable than any living tissue.  Living tissue will
decompose fairly rapidly, and decomposition can destroy DNA.

Most U.S. Courts now accept the FBI's standard of a 95% match as
admissible proof of identity.  In actuality, a 95% match isolates the
tested person into a group of about 55,000 individuals.  This apparently
loose figure is accepted based on statistics of population distribution;
the 55,000 possible matching people cannot have been at the scene of the
event in question at the same time.  If the suspect can be placed there,
it is statistically unlikely that any other candidate is the real perp.

Paternity evaluation relies to some extent on the mother's knowledge of
the men with whom she has had sex.  If she has slept with identical
twins such that either one could be the father, present technology is
not sufficient to tell which one is the real father.

-dick