The Natural Father: Genetic Paternity Testing, Marriage, and Fatherhood

Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 49-60

  Kaebnick, Gregory E ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ADOPTION; BEHAVIOR; BIOLOGY; CHILD CARE; CHILD HEALTH; CHILD PARENT RELATION; CHILD PSYCHOLOGY; DIVORCE; FAMILY; FATHER; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; GENETIC ANALYSIS; GENETIC CODE; GENETIC PROCEDURES; GENETIC TRAIT; HUMAN; HUMAN RIGHTS; LAW; MARRIAGE; MOLECULAR PHYLOGENY; MOTHER; PARENTHOOD; PATERNITY TEST; REVIEW; SOCIETY; SPERM DONOR;

EID: 1442275755     PISSN: 09631801     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/s0963180104131101     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110, 124 (1989) (citing Nicholas H. Adulturine Bastardy 1836; 1:9-10).
2. Lewin T. In genetic testing for paternity, law often lags behind science. New York Times 2001 Mar 11:A1.
3. See note 2, Lewin 2001. See also: Stanley A. So, who's your daddy? in DNA tests, TV finds elixir to raise ratings. New York Times 2002 Mar 19:C1. The media coverage is also discussed at length in: Nelkin D. Paternity palaver in the media: selling identity tests. Unpublished manuscript, Genetic Ties and the Future of the Family, University of Louisville Center for Bioethics and The Hastings Center.
4. See note 2, Lewin 2001. See also: Stanley A. So, who's your daddy? in DNA tests, TV finds elixir to raise ratings. New York Times 2002 Mar 19:C1. The media coverage is also discussed at length in: Nelkin D. Paternity palaver in the media: selling identity tests. Unpublished manuscript, Genetic Ties and the Future of the Family, University of Louisville Center for Bioethics and The Hastings Center.
5. See, for example: http://www.dnacenter.com; http://www.genetree.com; and http://www. betagenetics.com.
6. Anderlik M. Disestablishment suits: daddy no more? Unpublished manuscript, Genetic Ties and the Future of the Family, University of Louisville Center for Bioethics and The Hastings Center. See: 1999 Ohio H.B. 242 (2000 Jul 27).
7. Egerton B. DNA tests don't let dads off the hook: man supports sons not biologically his. Dallas Morning News 1999 Oct 31:A1.
8. Grossberg M. How to give the present a past? family law in the United States 1950-2000. In: Katz SN, Eekelaar J, MacLean M, eds. Cross Currents: Family Law and Policy in the United States and England. New York: Oxford University Press; 2000:3-29.
9. See note 7, Grossberg 2000:4-12.
10. See note 6, Egerton 1999.
11. See, for example: Paternity of Cheryl, 746 N.E. 2d. 488 (Mass. 2001); NPA v. WBA, 380 S.E. 2d. 178 (Va. Ct. App. 1989); Dews v. Dews, 632 A. 2d. 1160 (D.C. 1993).
12. Anderlik MR, Rothstein MA. DNA-based identity testing and the future of the family: a research agenda. American Journal of Law and Medicine 2002;28:215-32, at 218.
13. See, for example: Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110 (1989); Rodney F. v. Karen M., 71 Cal. Rptr. 2d. 399, 401 (Cal. Ct. App. 1998).
14. See, for example: Cavanaugh v. deBaudiniere, 493 N.W. 2d. 197, 197 (Neb. Ct. App. 1992); Marriage of K.E.V., 883 P. 2d. 1246 (Mont. 1994).
15. William Carl Langston v. Alice L. Riffe; William Carl Langston v. Sharon Locklear; Danielle R. v. Tyrone W., 359 Md. 396; 754 A. 2d. 389 (Md. 2000). Testing for such uses is also promoted; see http://www.dnagenetesting.com.
16. See: Grossberg M. Governing the Hearth: Law and Family in Nineteenth-Century America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press; 1985; Murray T. The Worth of a Child. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1996.
17. See: Grossberg M. Governing the Hearth: Law and Family in Nineteenth-Century America. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press; 1985; Murray T. The Worth of a Child. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1996.
18. Pufendorf S. On the Law of Nature and Nations. Oldfather C, Oldfather W, trans. 1934:ch. 2, § 4.
19. Finkler K. Experiencing the New Genetics: Family and Kinship on the Medical Frontier. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press; 2000:127. Emphasis in the original.
20. Lifton BJ. Journey of the Adopted Self: A Quest for Wholeness. New York: Basic Books; 1994, quoted in: Nelkin D. The DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Cultural Icon. San Francisco: Freeman; 1995:66.
21. Lifton BJ. Journey of the Adopted Self: A Quest for Wholeness. New York: Basic Books; 1994, quoted in: Nelkin D. The DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Cultural Icon. San Francisco: Freeman; 1995:66.
22. For an extended discussion of this view and criticism of opposing views, see: Turkheimer E. Heritability and biological explanation. Psychological Review 1998;105:782-91.
23. Golombok S. Parenting: What Really Counts? London: Routledge; 2000:36.
24. See note 20, Golombok 2000:27-8.
25. See note 20, Golombok 2000:28-9.
26. Goldstein J, Freud A, Solnit A. Beyond the Best Interests of the Child. New York: Free Press; 1973:19.
27. See note 15, Murray 1996:57ff.
28. See note 15, Murray 1996:47ff. Murray draws from: Boswell J. The Kindness of Strangers: The Abandonment of Children in Western Europe from Late Antiquity to the Renaissance. New York: Pantheon; 1988.
29. Dolgin JL. Choice, tradition, and the new genetics: the fragmentation of the ideology of family. Connecticut Law Review 2000;32:529.
30. For an extended discussion of the relevance of these three interests to parenthood, see: Blustein J. Parents and Children. New York: Oxford University Press; 1982:139ff.
31. The presumptive rules I identify are treated similarly by: Blustein J. Ethical issues in DNA-based paternity testing. Unpublished manuscript, Genetic Ties and the Future of the Family, University of Louisville Center for Bioethics and The Hastings Center.
32. See note 17, Finkler 2000:117ff.
33. Nelson JL. Genetic narratives: biology, stories, and the definition of the family. Health Matrix 1992;2:71-83.
34. A much more thorough discussion of the current law and policy options is found in: Rothstein M. Translating values and interests into the law of parentage determination. Unpublished manuscript, Genetic Ties and the Future of the Family, University of Louisville Center for Bioethics and The Hastings Center.
35. See note 5, Anderlik; 1999 Ohio H.B. 242 (2000 Jul 27).
36. National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Uniform Parentage Act, 2001 Jan 5 [UPA 2000]. The law also prohibits proceedings involving acknowledged or adjudicated fathers.
37. See note 33, UPA 2000, sect. 608.
38. Roberts P. Biology and Beyond: The Case for Passage of the New Uniform Parentage Act. Washington, D.C.: Center for Law and Social Policy; 2000:16ff.
39. Glennon T. Somebody's child: evaluating the erosion of the marital presumption of paternity. West Virginia Law Review 2000;102:547-605, at 569.