Nervous About Tests?

Imagine if your whole life really did rest on the results of a test. Alan Zarembo of the Los Angeles Times had an article on how DNA testing is revealing lies and secrets, including adoptions and paternity fraud.

In one case, two brothers were surprised to discover they had different fathers. They confronted their elderly mother, who denied the most obvious possibilities -- that she had been unfaithful to her husband, the man they had always known as Dad, or that one son was adopted.

Perhaps she was raped. Or maybe she is an adulterer and a liar.

How many of us are not our fathers' children?

The question has fascinated researchers as a window into the gap between a society's stated values and its behavior. A 2005 analysis of 17 studies -- based on blood and DNA tests of various groups -- concluded that the answer varies depending on country and culture. But the average rate is 4%.

Some studies show as high as 20%. But even at 4%, that means one in twenty-five kids are assigned to a man who isn't really the father and wasn't given the choice.

Breaking the news falls to genetic counselors, who often must balance competing ethical imperatives.

How ethical is being complicit in hiding the truth from a victim?

Ana Morales, a genetic counselor at the University of Miami, recalled the case of a child diagnosed with a type of albinism that can be accompanied by lung and kidney disease.

The mother "told me she was having an affair," Morales said.

"She said she would be in physical danger [if her husband found out]. He had threatened her if she was unfaithful."

Morales did not tell him.

If she was truly scared that he would be violent, she wouldn't have had the affair in the first place. If she wasn't scared enough to refrain from adultery, then the counselor should not be too scared to tell the guy he is a chump who is being defrauded. The adulterous woman can go to a shelter. She shouldn't be with a man who is violent anyway. Where is the proof that he is violent?

But withholding the information means that the woman's husband lives with the false belief that he is a carrier of a genetic disorder.

That sort of information is far from benign, said Dr. Wayne Grody, a UCLA geneticist. It could convince him to give up on the idea of having children. And in the event that the wife becomes pregnant by her husband, perpetuating the lie could require unnecessary prenatal testing.

"Why would you expose the next fetus to the risk of amniocentesis?" Grody asked.

To protect a woman's prerogative to cheat, of course.

DNA testing for newborns should be mandatory unless there is a sworn statement of it being against both "parents'" conscience (religion). If the DNA matches, assign paternity to the man. If it doesn't, give the man the choice of denying paternity.

Men can now get DNA testing kits and find out for themselves. Ah, how sweet it is. Unfortunately, even if he finds out that his wife is cheater and a liar, in most places and in most cases, he'll still have to pay her alimony and pay child support for another man's child should there be a divorce – even if she is the one to file.

Michigan Charges Unmarried ‘Fathers’ for Delivery

What's up in Michigan?

The state of Michigan is giving a father a choice: pay the medical cost of his daughter's birth or marry the girl's mother.

I can tell you right now which would cost him less.

Gary Johnson was billed $3,800 for the birth of his daughter JaeLyn, The Flint Journal reported in Sunday online editions.

And how much was she billed? Unless this was rape, having a baby was her decision as much as his - more, given all of the post-conception options women have.

Johnson is not married to the child's mother, Rebecca Witt.

Assuming the child is biologically his, this means they were fornicating. Sounds like they are shacking up, too.

The Michigan Legislature amended the state's paternity act five years ago to waive birthing costs for a father, if he married the child's mother. A year later, Witt gave birth to JaeLyn. The state paid for the hospital costs because Witt was on Medicaid at the time and is now trying to recover the money.

So married people get to pass along the costs to everyone else?

Jack Battles, the Genesee County Friend of the Court, said the law is an incentive to maintain the sanctity of marriage.

"It's totally up to them," said Battles, whose office enforces paternity rulings, child support and other aspects of family law. Until Johnson can produce a marriage license, "they have to pay."

Sounds like he has to pay. If they are not married, and he is billed, she is not being ordered to pay.

Johnson and Witt said they want to marry eventually, but Witt said she wants her marriage date to be her choice.

"I don't think anybody should tell me when to get married," said Witt. "I would like to have a nice wedding, and I can wait for it."

Your child needs married parents. You forfeited your moral right to a nice wedding on a date of your leisure when you got knocked up and then kept the child instead of adopting the child out.

Johnson said he understood the state wants to promote marriage for parents but he respects Witt's position. "It's a woman's dream to have the best wedding she can have," he said.

We all want something. But when we drag kids into it, our wants need to wait behind their needs.

Engagement Ring Pressure

Michelle works for a Los Angeles-based talk radio station, specifically the morning drive program. She has a blog on the station's official website, and I wanted to share some of her comments from a recent entry. I couldn't detect a permalink, but the entry is currently found here.

Michelle recently accepted a marriage proposal, and shows uncommon sense about engagement ring and sympathy for her intended.

Here's the thing. From the get go, when we got serious, I told him I was not one of those girls who would insist on a big, fat ring. I originally wanted to use my grandmother’s first engagement ring, a tiny diamond set in a classic band of white gold. Unfortunately, that got stolen when my home was broken into when we first got our home...Other than that ring, a ring really didn’t even come into play much, it wouldn't have bothered me even if I didn’t get one for an engagement, a wedding band alone would have been fine if that's what we chose to do.

I wish more women were like her in this regard.

So I told him, when, and if the time comes, don't stress about it. You know me, you know the person I am, don't stress out about it.

He should have taken her at his word, and her opinion should have been more important than anyone else's on the matter. But he let other people get to him.

Well, apparently, he wasn't stressing until a bunch of people at his work made him question his choice by saying

'Oh no, you can't buy THAT ring, you have to buy a big diamond.'

To those people, I would have asked, "Why?"

"No, you have to spend at least $2000 or she's going to be upset!"

Why, is she a prostitute?

'What will people think about that ring? All her friends are going to be looking at it and judging you!'

That is one of the worst. Who cares what they think, if that is the way they are?

Then he started looking into it and was bombarded with the whole idiotic business that's been set up to suck men into the ridiculous notion that you have to spend at least two month's salary on a ring to prove to your girlfriend that you love her.

That's a marketing slogan and has no basis in reality. We are not obligated to listen to it. If a woman thinks a guy should have spent more on the ring and tells him so, he should run away from her as fast as he can.

In my personal opinion, any woman (or man) who is 'upset' with any engagement ring or other jewelry that their significant other buys them for any reason because it’s not 'big enough' or the 'clarity' isn't right, isn't anything but a shallow materialistic gold digging moron who cares nothing about the real meaning of love...If your personal worth is tied to a piece of jewelry, there's something wrong with you...All of you girls who want big, flashy rings, are missing out on some VERY good men out there, so think twice about what's REALLY important.

She should print that on t-shirts and sell them. He got the ring at a Costco, and she's happy about it.

Now, from what she wrote, it sounds like they have been shacking up, which I'm convinced is wrong and makes the odds less favorable to their marriage being a lasting, happy one. But on the plus side, she does not let materialism or the herd mentality turn her into a ungrateful little girl. Instead, she's happy about the ring. Good for her!

My wife was happy to figure out, when she was going through bank records, that I'd purchased the ring I presented when I proposed for about a third of the retail price. That kind of sensible frugality on her part is one of the reasons I proposed.

Side note to any guys planning to pop the question: In some states, it may be advantageous to avoid doing so on her birthday, Valentine's Day, Christmas, an "anniversary", or any day that can be construed as a gift-giving day. This may prevent her from being able to keep/sell the ring should she divorce you or leave you before the wedding, and compel her to return it to you. If that doesn't sound like a romantic consideration… well, it isn't very romantic to go through divorce, either, and have her profit at your expense on top of that. The matter will only come into play should there be a divorce – so she shouldn't have an objection unless she is planning to divorce you. Or, if she insists on shopping for the ring with you, or to get it on one of those gift-giving days, make sure she pays for it with her money and she can have as big of a ring as she wants and do whatever she wants to with it. Should you give her the ring unconnected to any other gift-giving occasion, a court may see her possession of it as being conditional to your impending marriage. Should she leave you before the marriage or divorce you, it may be easier to get it back.

Phone Calls and Dining Out

A couple of recent Dear Abby situations caught my eye.

Okay, this guy never explicitly says what he's looking for, but from what he did write, it sounds like he is looking for a relationship. That makes a difference.

HURT IN VERMONT wrote in to talk about a date:

One night I was at her place when she received a phone call. Trish made it short and sweet and hung up. A few minutes later, I asked who it was, and she told me it was her boss.

Unless you are paying the phone bill, it really isn't your business who calls her. Keep in mind, though, that if you were on a date with her, she shouldn't be taking any calls, especially if you are paying for the date. But you are in her home, and it is her phone.

Abby, I know how she answers the phone when it's her boss -- and it wasn't him. When I said, "That was NOT your boss," she admitted it was one of her boss's clients, but said nothing was going on between them.

When I first met Trish, she mentioned that a client had come in one day, had wine and cheese, then leaned over and kissed her. It's the same guy that called -- and he's married.

Her mistake was not telling you from the start that it is none of your business. By the way, that works the other way, too. If she asked you who you were talking with on the phone, it would be perfectly okay to tell her that it is none of her business. Can't handle that? Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

I don't think she has cheated, but she lied to my face.

She didn't handle the situation right and she is flirting with a married man. Is that relationship material to you?

My first instinct is to dump her, but I love her.

So what if you love her? You're paranoid and she is a liar who flirts with a married man. I can't believe this is in his 40s and writing like this to Dear Abby. What's wrong with him? I would be shocked if he was raised with a father in his home and a faithful mother.

Dear Abby responded:

Are you and Trish in a committed relationship? If not, you had no right to question her about who was calling.

Even then... as long as it is her phone, paid for by her, he should not question it. If he can't trust her, they shouldn't be together.

That said, a person who would lie to you once would lie to you twice.

Yes.

She may not be having a physical affair, but something is going on or she wouldn't have tried to mislead you about who was on the phone.

Maybe he freaks out over nothing and she didn't want to deal with that? If so, she should dump him.

SOLO IN SHERMAN, TEXAS wrote:

Is it proper for a married woman to go out to eat alone when her husband refuses to take her?

Why does he refuse to take her? Is he a hermit? Is he embarrassed to be around her? Is he hoping she'll cook, instead, or is he willing to cook? Is money tight? We don't know.

Absolutely, if she can afford to pay for it and there is enough pet food in the doghouse.

[Emphasis mine.] Wow, did I find an example in Dear Abby where the woman was given the same response a man would have been given? Good!

In the Lion's Den?

I've read about XXX Church (which reaches out to porn workers and users) before, and I haven't seen red flags in regard to their teachings or tactics, but then I haven't looked too hard. They did a great job of getting themselves portrayed well in a place that can be somewhat hostile to their message – an LATimes.com blog. Blogger Richard Abowitz caught up with them at the annual Adult Entertainment Expo in Las Vegas.

Notice that when the blogger asks Gross if he thinks the porn workers and fans are going to Hell, he replies:

It is not my call to make. I screw up everyday in the things I do, and I am not a porn star. And I don't feel better than someone who is in porn.

Later, he says:

You can't blame the dark for being dark, you need to blame the light for not shining on the dark.

I hope their ministry is being used by God to bear good fruit, and that they are able to be "in, but not of" in this case.

A Dispute in Bed

Time to check in with Dear Abby again. CREATURE OF HABIT wrote:

My boyfriend and I have a wonderful relationship, but there is one big problem. I don't like to share blankets at bedtime. The truth is, I like to sleep comfortably with my blankets tucked all around.

Well that won't be a problem until you are married, right? So you are trying to work this all out before you get married? If so, that's very good, thinking ahead like that.

I have honestly tried sharing, but I can't sleep that way or even get comfortable.

Wait, you tried sharing? You mean you are fornicating or shacking up?

My boyfriend thinks I'm weird and that I don't like being close to him at night. Isn't sharing a bed enough?

More than enough.

Dear Abby wrote back:

Getting enough sleep is important for maintaining one's health, and studies show that people aren't getting enough of it these days. Try explaining this to him, along with the fact that intimacy is what happens BEFORE you hit the sheets.

Hmmm. I wonder what Abby would say if this was a guy writing in to explain why he doesn't like to cuddle after sex, but instead takes off and goes home? Somehow, I doubt it would be "intimacy is what happens BEFORE you hit the sheets."

If it is really that big of a deal to either one of them, then they shouldn't get married to each other. They've already lowered their odds of staying together anyway.

As a general rule, never marry someone if you can finish this sentence with a "red flag" or a "can’t stand" or a "deeal breaker" or anything that you couldn't happily live with the rest of your life without complaining or being resentful: "I love everything about him/her and everything is great between us, except _______."

These people apparently like fornicating with each other. That's different from sleeping in the same bed or being married, and they should not marry each other solely based on mutual enjoyment of their fornication or some other compatibilities if there are any significant areas where they are incompatible.

AOL Piece on Attracting Men

The Biblical Manhood blog has been updated after a vacation, and called my attention to this AOL piece on how women can be more attractive to men. No, it is mostly NOT about physical appearance.

Of "neediness", it says:

Relentlessly saying, "I miss you," throwing (not so) silent temper tantrums when you don't have his full attention and feeling an insatiable desire for his approval are all classic needy behaviors.

Those are not good. Yes, most men love being the hero. But you can let him do that without being needy.

One of the pieces of advice I disagree with is "Trash Your Perfect Man List". Keep the list. Just do not make the boundaries impossibly narrow. Unless there is some odd, specific need, requiring that the man be exactly 6'2" is too narrow. If you are 5'7", anything from 5'9" upward should be okay. If you insist that he is earning six figures or more, then you’d better be under 30, attractive, and not overweight. I recommend that men and women come up with a list of what they need in a spouse, and what they'd like, but don’t need. What they'd like would be an extra bonus. What they need is non-negotiable. For example, I knew that if I was going to marry, I needed to marry a follower of Christ. I would have liked it if she had the same musical tastes as me. If you find someone who meets all of our needs in a spouse, you are being too narrow if you reject them in hopes of finding someone who also meets what you would like. If, however, you have multiple prospects who meet your needs, then of course you persue most strongly the one who meets more of what you'd like.

The writer also advises that you "Drop Your Story":

There are the basic facts (education, politics, spirituality) and there's the various ways in which you label yourself: I'm bad with money. I'm unattractive. I'm too old. When you drop your story and allow yourself to be simply who you are right now, you instantly become more alive, more engaged and more irresistible.

I can see the point being made, as we should put out best foot forward, but do not hide who you are. Rather than hiding that you are bad with money, why not improve your financial behaviors? If you hide anything significant about yourself, you are setting yourself up to have an angry man on your hands who will hold back from putting all of himself into the relationship.

As the BM blog notes, there are comments on the website by women essentially insisting that they should be able to be self-centered nags exhibiting serious personality flaws and still be taken care of by the perfect man. Those women can't possibly have happy husbands, and the ones with unhappy husbands may not care, but the fact is, their lives would be so much better if they started being kind and caring towards the needs of their husbands.