Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

DIY DNA

DIY DNA: Who's your daddy?

DAVID EDDIE

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 8:07 AM EDT 06/05/08

When your son is so positive, so even-tempered, so handsome – so unlike you – there is only one thing to do, David Eddie writes: Grab a home paternity kit ...Read the full article

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

  1. Richard Lovegrove from Toronto, Canada writes: Great article! Studies show up to 10% of children are born to a different father than their 'alleged' father.
  2. The Mad Laffer from Ottawa, Canada writes: I find this article to be a bit creepy. I think the author violated the trust of his wife in doing this behind her back. If you really have doubts about the paternity of your children then perhaps it would be wiser to seek relationship counselling rather than subjecting your children to this while the wife is away. This product definitely caters to the insecure paranoid type.
  3. slapdash dapoint from Canada writes: between my brother and sister, i could be a 3rd or 4th cousin. personality-wise, i stand out from them as well. i've occasionally wondered, but i have, on the whole, a great family, and would never dream of doing something like this, regardless of ease.

    i'm lucky being my father's and mother's son, and would want no others. different siblings, perhaps... ;)

    i can't imagine being this guy's son if he has done this in any sort of serious manner. does identigene provide guidance on how to regain the trust of your family?
  4. D M from Canada writes: The Mad Laffer from Ottawa:

    I completely agree. This guy is a creep. The thing to do would have been to talk to his wife about his concerns (and of course she would have bee angry but at least it would have shown some maturity) then do the test together. What we can take from this article is that this man is insecure, paranoid and untrustworthy. Though I completely understanding the usefulness of this test in general, I feel sorry for his wife.
  5. Kate Meloney from Canada writes: I highly doubt that he did this behind his wife's back. If you are reading about it here, I'm pretty sure its not a secret he's trying to keep from his wife! Take it for the light hearted informative story it was meant to be.
  6. D F from Canada writes: Sometimes knowing is better than wondering. If you really are wondering (for whatever reason), that affects how you deal with people too. I doubt if this was truly behind his wife's back (story research). It doesn't mean he loved or would love his child less. What if it had been a hospital error and babies had gotten switched? So most of us wouldn't do the test - great don't buy the kit. But there are some very good reasons for having access to it - health history for one. As well, it could really help some kids. I went through a very long stage thinking I was adopted and my parents wouldn't tell me (I know lots of kids go through it). I never doubted their love, but I did doubt I was theirs by birth. A test would have saved them a lot of reassuring and contradicting me.
  7. mary wells from Canada writes: What would you have done if you discovered this beautiful child was not yours?I think you need some counselling,and a good swift kick to the seat of your pants.
  8. Dude Love from Toronto, Canada writes: I think people misunderstood the 'tongue in cheek' tone of the article.
  9. David C from Canada writes: Kate Meloney - I agree 100%. The tone of the article is obviously tongue in cheek, and meant to convey information on the availability of genetic testing in a light hearted, self deprecating manner. And I would imagine his wife reads the articles he writes (probably helps edit them, if she is like my wife).

    Talk about missing the tone of the article! Everyone can put away the number to the child abuse hotline now ...
  10. M B from Columbus, United States writes: No matter what positvie comments about his wife David uses to couch this in a positive way--he has made a nasty accusation by actually going ahead with the test. HE has undeniably broken the trust of this marriage. This, sadly because of his own personal insecurity and his admittedly negative attitude. His wife must have one calm and confident and unshakeable personality to handle this news! I personally would feel as if HE'D been unfaithful to the marriage! How can you trust someone who doubts you so? What a shame... this woman has been or will be broadsided by this.
  11. A Allan from vancouver, Canada writes: I think it's a great idea. Then maybe his son can test the dad to see if this dork is really his father.
  12. C H from Capital, Canada writes: Wow! Some of the commenters should look online to see where they can buy a sense of humour. Read the article again...
  13. Captain Kirk from Canada writes: Is this embedded advertising? I can't tell anymore, the lines are getting hazy. Must be the resolution of my new Dell 2000 LCD Monitor with touchscreen capability.
  14. Greg M from Canada writes: A Allan, totally agree!!
  15. Neon Cab from Canada writes: David Eddie is a humour writer. His family is fodder. His wife is aware of this.
    On that note, I appreciate this article. I wouldn't go through with the test, but jokes like this run rampant in my family. One of my sons, for example, is perfectly like me, but the other... And then there's my neice who looks like me but I don't look like my brother (her father). At the right time, in the right crowd, making jokes about these twisted genetic occurrences strikes the perfect chord (and they are just genetic twists because there's a lot of potential for variation in merely .03% of our DNA).
    BTW the only thing David wrote that he did with his wife not present is conduct the actual test. I'm certain he joked with her long before ordering the kit. She likely was even aware that he was doing it and why (which I believe was more to get fodder for a funny article than to betray the trust of his marriage).
    Lighten up, eh.
  16. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: In an ideal world we all have completely trustworthy spouses who never have a weak moment, no-one cheats, no-one is tempted, and no children are born outside the relationship, nobody has any insecurities of any sort, and no relationship ever goes through trying times which might disturb the serene perfection of our society.

    Until that world arrives, this test is helpful. Women know the child is theirs, so it's very easy for them to dismiss the male perspective. If a little test can put his mind to rest, great.

    After all there are a lot of dupped men supporting another man's child because the mother wrote the name of the richest man she slept with on the birth documents. In fact, this test should be made freely available to any man being told to pay support.
  17. Sue City from Ottawa, Canada writes: Hey folks, I think this article was written 'tongue in cheek'. And, his wife knew all about it... it's in a national newspaper!
  18. Peter Bud from Canada writes: I wonder if Prince Charles read this article?

    Note to the humourless: THIS IS A JOKE.
  19. J M from Canada writes: Cumulonimbus is such a lovely word - it made his description of his pessimism so visual.

    Well written, humourous, informative and tactful.

    I would not consider it advertising as private, do-it-yourself DNA testing is news.
  20. Winston Churchill from London, Canada writes: Peter Bud: I don't know about Prince Charles, but if I were the Home Secretary, I'd be ordering Harry's cheeks swabbed vigorously.
  21. Iain's Opinion from Canada writes: Geeze Louise, maybe they should have a protocol where sarcasm, irony, tongue in cheek,just joking etc have their own color or font so that you literalists don't get too confused.
    As for this talk to her then do the test together nonsense, well, that's just plain non sense.
  22. Maggie Now from Canada writes: Sue City from Ottawa, Canada writes: Hey folks, I think this article was written 'tongue in cheek'. And, his wife knew all about it... it's in a national newspaper

    actually it was a 'swab in cheek' article!

    Sorry the articles humour is contagious!
  23. Dave L from Toronto, Canada writes: I really enjoyed reading this! Been a while that I have seen such lighthearted yet very informative reading this.
  24. BC Refugee in AB from Canada writes: Well written and light article...and lets face facts folks, his wife knew about this all along, and the real reason for this test is not a family situation as described here....it's just like the home preggy tests, sure the ads show 2 late 20's professionals who have a plan and finacial assets to raise a child with the best of everything, but we all know home preggy kits are mainly used by 18 yr olds sweating the 3 minute wait and dredding telling mom and dad, while all the while wondering if their cool boyfriend would keep his job at the warehouse and sell his Mustang and support you.
  25. Sunny Vegas from Canada writes: 'Richard Lovegrove from Toronto, Canada writes: Great article! Studies show up to 10% of children are born to a different father than their 'alleged' father. '

    That stats is old. I read that stats like 15 years ago when I was in High school.

    The way everything is now.

    I would say. 15 - 20% is more like it.
  26. Graeme C from Ottawa, Canada writes: Ummm...its an ad people. Nothing more, nothing less. Of course its humour, of course his family knew about it. So why would the G&M use a baseless, factless article to occupy precious inches of print - because they are getting money for it from Identigene...shame on you G&M.
  27. Luke R from Toronto, Canada writes: The Mad Laffer from Ottawa, Canada writes: I find this article to be a bit creepy. I think the author violated the trust of his wife in doing this behind her back. If you really have doubts about the paternity of your children then perhaps it would be wiser to seek relationship counselling rather than subjecting your children to this while the wife is away. This product definitely caters to the insecure paranoid type.
    *****
    You're concerned about the violation of the wife's trust? How about the violation of th child's rights not to be subject to genetics testing that is not medically necessary without his consent/ascent?
  28. Mr. Justice from I, Canada writes: 'What would you have done if you discovered this beautiful child was not yours?I think you need some counselling,and a good swift kick to the seat of your pants.'

    . . . interesting that the 'problem' would be HIS, according to that commenter; there is no mention in that comment about any sort of responsibility on the part of the mother, or the man with whom she had created this child (had the results been different). . . . but it certainly makes sense to those who endorse sexism; if the genders were reversed in a story such as this, the comment would have been quite different, obviously. Gotta love people who cling doggedly to PC double standards.
  29. * Lozange from Toronto, Canada writes: The National Enquirer is always looking for this level of journalism
  30. Duncan McCockenue from Canada writes: Oh fer f* sakes... this was a hilarious article a-la-The Onion. Some of you squares. no... cubes; require a humourous bone implant. This by no means illustrates the authors opinion that everyone should test the DNA of their children if they even have a shred of doubt! Friggin dorks!
  31. Kay Ay from Canada writes: Didn't we just have an article about using your kids (blogging)...

    Yes, it was funny but his wife must be a saint to put up with this level of insanity. Your child is an angel-boy and therefore you doubt he is yours?
    I'd be glad if my kids didn't have my more negative personality traits...but lets just say there is NO DOUBT they are mine (and not just 'cause I'm the mother) :)
  32. Chris Edwards from Greater Sudbury, Canada writes: For those of you who missed the point, this was all about sarcasm and satire. I laughed out loud at the article, but laughed even harder at some of the responses. Some of you really need to take a pill.
  33. Antonio San from Canada writes: Fine, he IS the father; but is SHE the Mother?
  34. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: This reminds me of a conversation I recently had with my dad. We were talking about blood types and blood donations and stuff, and I pulled out my Canadian Blood Services card and mentioned that I was A negative. He responded, 'You f**king well better be.' I laughed 'til I was sick. True story - the conversation took place about a year ago.
  35. Hail to the Conservatives ! from London, Canada writes: Or stop grabbing your wife - because somebody else is obviously doing it for you.
  36. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: There was an excellent article in Men's Health Magazine about paternity questions last fall. They told the stories of several men who didn't realize they weren't the father until the child was several years old. What's worse, when doctors discover that a child has a different father, he is under no obligation to inform the father of this. In fact, in some states, the doctor is PROHIBITED from informing the man, unless he cannot avoid it in explaining some inherited medical condition that the child should not have. Not sure what the law is in Canada. People can scoff at this all they want, but men have been worried about this forever. It is an evolved trait. In almost no species can the male be sure his mate's offspring are his. Women never doubt if the kid is their's, it comes out of them so there is no room for questioning. But men have an inate suspicion of such things. No, I'm not saying every man doubts the paternal origins of his kids, but it is quite natural to have lingering doubts. Those of you suggesting relationship counselling are missing the point completely. Relationship counselling won't answer the question regarding the kid's father. Yes, I realize the article was written tongue-in-cheek. The author wanted to try out the kit, so he wrote a humourous article about it. The issue, however, is a real one.
  37. david eddie from Canada writes: The Mad Laffer from Ottawa, Canada writes: I find this article to be a bit creepy. I think the author violated the trust of his wife in doing this behind her back. If you really have doubts about the paternity of your children.

    My dear friends: You do understand that this article was humorous in nature? That I performed the test not behind my wife's back but with her full consent?

    Maybe humorous pieces do need a special font. Or maybe I need to put one of those little smiley-face emoticons after every other sentence.

    sigh I thought Canadians were subtle, ironic, etc. So many thundering, blustering literalists in this country pounding their fists on the bully pulpit. Relax, allow yourselves to be entertained. Not everything has to be a debate over right vs. wrong.

    Mad Laffer you may need another 'handle.'
  38. Tinfoil Hatt from Dogpatch, Canada writes: My wife always says our dog bears an eerie resemblance to me so I got the test to prove I wasn't the father. Imagine my chagrin when the test came back positive! Turns out the mother was some b!tch I played 'fetch the stick' with at the company picnic a few years back. It all came back to me in a nostalgic flood--she had the loveliest eyes, and such a cute, furry little rump! I wonder where the rest of the litter ended up ...
  39. Jim Somerville from Ottawa, Canada writes: Your family doctor really wants to know a detailed medical history of your parents so they can do a proper job of applying preemptive medicine. Can you imagine the healthcare impact of half that data being incorrect?

    http://himmicane.blogspot.com
  40. elizabeth vann from victoria, b.c., Canada writes: I've noticed over time that a good number of posters to this site have no sense of humour.

    At least, to this point, no one has yet managed to blame a politician or point too many fingers. So this article has had some positive effect.

    We can only hope.
  41. Mike 10 Rules to Reduce Belly Fat from Toronto, Canada writes: Good to know that such tests exist. I wonder what is the gene match percentage in the test of not being a father.
  42. Anger Equals Danger from Canada writes: After many fights and harsh words, my son's ex had started dropping hints that maybe she wasn't so sure her son (my grandson)was my son's child. We used the test and sure enough, the boy is NOT a blood relation to our family.

    WE HAVE LOVED HIM FOR 12 YEARS AND WE LOVE HIM JUST THE SAME, and ALWAYS WILL.

    It just means my son can file to reclaim 12 years of child support if he so desires.
  43. Rick Swerve from Vancouver, Canada writes: Wow! I had no idea that the average reader of the G&M is so ridiculously stupid. Anyone who could not see this was a humorous article must have their head right up their butt.

    Good article Dave. Funny, interesting, and well written.
  44. Carole Yeaman from Almonte (Ottawa), Canada writes: Hey Tinfoil You've (at long last) given me my first real chuckle of this week. Dave Eddie falls far short of Dave Barry; but you, Tinfoil Hatt, sound like you might be able to replace our late, lamented Mordecai Richler. Too bad it's a bit late for scraping HIS cheek.
  45. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Anger Equals Danger, hope your son doesn't count on getting that child support back. Legally, the child may be considered 'a child of the marriage' (regardless of whether your son and his ex were married at the time) and he may be on the hook, not only for the first 12 years, but to 18 years and maybe college tuition besides.
  46. The Mad Laffer from Ottawa, Canada writes: Touche Mr. Eddie.

    I concede that the article is written in jest, though I will not take back my original assertion that it was a bit creepy. Then again, some of Canada's greatest comics have been a tad on the creepy side (Jim Carrey I'm looking at you!).

    I must say that I am honoured for two reasons. First, that you, the author of this article, has responded to my comment (I have not received one response to any of the dozens of comments I have previously posted so your response has me estatic). Second, you imply that I am representative of the entire Canadian sense of humour, or lack thereof.

    I look forward to reading your future articles, and perhaps I will spare a chuckle or two next time.

    The thundering blustering moralizing literalist formerly known as the Mad Laffer (insert emoticon here)
  47. David C from Canada writes: I realize this can be a very serious issue, so to those who don't find the topic funny, please don't take offense to the following:

    My top 10 List of 'People who I'd buy the Paternity Test for, If I could see the Results:'

    1. Prince Charles, William & Harry (already mentioned)

    2. Michael Jackson & kids

    3. JFK's 'son' living in Vancouver

    4. .....OK, I'm out. Anyone else?
  48. david eddie from Canada writes: Carole Yeaman from Almonte (Ottawa), Canada writes: Dave Eddie falls far short of Dave Barry

    ? I write circles around that punk
  49. J Broomer from Toronto (but really Etobicoke), Canada writes: I suppose G&M will now have to put an extra banner below headlines:

    'THIS IS A HUMOUR ARTICLE AND MAY NOT REFLECT THE ACTUAL EVENTS'

    For those commenting how horrid this was for him to do, perhaps you should consider signing up for this year's Upper Class Twit of the Year Race.
  50. Rick Drysdale from Canada writes: David Eddie

    Once, David Eddie was a freewheeling comic novelist. Then, after years of slow-roasting in Bachelor Hell, Mr. Eddie met Ms. Right-who delivered an ultimatum on her thirtieth birthday: 'Fertilize my eggs within the next three years, or pack your bags.' 'Housebroken' is the shocking true story of one man's painfully funny evolution from single cad to stay-at-home dad-from man-about-town to man-of-the-house. In his own words, Eddie describes how a bachelor who never kept anything in the fridge but condiments and beer actually learns to cook for the whole family. In vivid detail, he shows how a man who let ashtrays flow over and dishes stack up for months on end can miraculously clean the house. In charge of a child, he comes up with logical reasons why every parent should rope-a-dope the kid. And within a three-block radius of his house, he somehow manages to find adventure.
  51. Rick Drysdale from Canada writes: Another author to look for great stuff.
  52. Steve Not an Alberta Redneck from Calgary, Canada writes: Sunny Vegas from Canada writes: ' 'Richard Lovegrove from Toronto, Canada writes: Great article! Studies show up to 10% of children are born to a different father than their 'alleged' father. '

    That stats is old. I read that stats like 15 years ago when I was in High school. The way everything is now. I would say. 15 - 20% is more like it.'

    Which is why the current craze to trace one's ancestry is such a crock.
  53. Simply Red from Canada writes: Dude Love from Toronto, Canada writes: I think people misunderstood the 'tongue in cheek' tone of the article.
    ---
    I agree wholeheartedly! ANybody who reads this column regularly would know David Eddie would not be the sort of rat Ba$tard who would do this publicly -- without telling his wife.

    And yes, the article would probably scar his child for life if he ever came across it in (say) his teens... unless ole dad explains he was just goffing around. But I'm sure Mr. Eddie will take care of that.
  54. Bert Fegg from Canada writes: UMMM - If you think this GUY is bad GO read about the WOMAN that uses her child to get TRINKLETS FOR MOTHER'S DAY

    ~FEGG
  55. boz dobbs from toronto, Canada writes: I think there,s a lot of ladies getting very nervous these days.
  56. Terri Timmons from Canada writes: If men could get pregnant, a woman's right to a maternity test would be socially acceptable, ethical, and enshrined in the Consitution (particularly if child support was involved).
  57. Phil Stooke from London, Canada writes: His wife is 'not unattractive'? I'd say she could do better...
  58. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: Many serious and relevant topics are best approached with some humor, and this article is mildly amusing.

    I welcome the comments on paternity concerns, and the social consequences. Dismissing this discussion in favor of cheap 'slapstick' jokes makes the comments too boring to read.
  59. slapdash dapoint from Canada writes: Duncan McCockenue from Canada writes: Oh fer f* sakes... this was a hilarious article a-la-The Onion. Some of you squares. no... cubes; require a humourous bone implant.

    if i want funny, i'll go to the onion (which has been weeeak lately).

    i have one of the loosest senses of humour, but i still don't see this article as funny. while i'm not offended like some others, the humour just doesn't come across to me. that old thing about irony and sarcasm in print maybe. perhaps a differnt SECTION should be created for pieces like this. or maybe i should just read more of the author's work.

    what i do like and appreciate is eddie reading the comments and responding. for that reason alone i'm impressed.
  60. Gavin Neil from Funnytown, Canada writes: Will the real Mr. David Eddie please stand up?

    Oh wait, he already has ;o)

    In defence of our collective sense of humour, lots of posters (me included) thought the article was funny and meant that way. These discussion boards provide a very congenial environment for trolls and the like; few of the people who simply read and enjoy an article and take it for what its worth bother to write that they thought a piece was pretty good.

    That being said, to all you trolls - did you not stop to think that once he published the piece in the Globe his story would be out? That he would face the music and it would all make no sense? Good grief! Or how about just noticing that the people he describes are all caricatures, including himself?? This was mostly post 10 AM, don't blame the coffee. Your browser may have spellcheck, but the ThinkCheck (tm) you have to do yourself.
  61. Jennifer Rollison from Canada writes: I don't care if this article is 'tongue-in-cheek' it's a disgusting suggestion. Eddie is always a bit trite but this is beyond the pale.
  62. Fake Name from Canada writes: ' Richard Lovegrove from Toronto, Canada writes: Great article! Studies show up to 10% of children are born to a different father than their 'alleged' father.'

    That's a very conservative estimate, and generally only holds in the most faithful population groups (as I recall, that was the Amish community). Its closer to 16-20% in the mainstream urban population.
  63. Just Asking from Canada writes: I thought the article was amusing but somehow I doubt the real D. Eddie is on board here. It's probably a 12 year old girl posing as a middle aged guy sitting in front of his computer.
  64. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Jennifer Rollinson, disgusting that a man can now be as sure as a woman that the child is really his, if he so chooses? Seems like basic equality to me.
  65. Sean L. from Toronto Center, Canada writes: 'Jennifer Rollison from Canada writes: I don't care if this article is 'tongue-in-cheek' it's a disgusting suggestion.'

    What is disgusting - that your spouse might now be able to catch you? Or that your word could be in doubt? Maybe you feel your spouse should have blind obedience and faith in you, inspite of your actions.

    If you are innocent you have nothing to fear, and as the crazy austrian incest story tells us - just because you were married for a million years does not mean you REALLY know you spouse. Plenty of people have lots of reasons to have doubts about their spouse's fidelity, and contrary to what women may want us to believe, it is not all the husbands who are doing the cheating.

    At least a test like this would resolve those doubts one way or another. As for whether there is sufficient trust to justify the continuance of the relationship, that is a completely separate matter.
  66. John McMortimer-Boyles from An Undisclosed Underground Location Safe From Nuclear Attack, Canada writes: It does raise a very interesting point for discussion.

    How many people, given easy and ready access to home DNA test kits, would do this kind of testing? Given such kits are probably not 100% perfect, how do you deal with the fallout from a false positive. that is, a test that says your kid isn't yours when in fact the kid really is yours?

    Others have already suggested other aspects of this kind of testing vis-a-vis level of trust in a relationship.

    Personally, I find the idea of people using commercially produced kits to do home DNA analysis kind of scary.

    At the same time, I see incredible benefits to having professionally done DNA testing available to health care professionals who can use it to help recommend treatments or encourage life style choices to prevent diseases.

    It's a brave new world folks.
  67. Sean L. from Toronto Center, Canada writes: 'John McMortimer-Boyles from An Undisclosed Underground Location Safe From Nuclear Attack, Canada writes: Personally, I find the idea of people using commercially produced kits to do home DNA analysis kind of scary.'

    John, you are confusing SAMPLE COLLECTION with DNA ANALYSIS. It does not take a PHD to swab a q-tip across the inside of a cheek - and the only possible user error could be in cross contamination of the samples, which could be detected in the analysis.
  68. Puntal Puntal from Calgary, Canada writes: Maybe his wife is faithful, but just spent a lot of time in front of the microwave during pregnancy.
  69. Jeff D from Toronto, Canada writes: having doubts is like a festering wound. it would be far better to get the test done and be able to trust your wife 100%.
  70. james p from Canada writes: loosen the bowties, this is a PR puff piece.
  71. l h from bonn, Germany writes: The author is probably one of the most irresponsible persons ever and unfit as a father. This is a prime example of hijacking your relationship. If you ever land in family court, this will be used against you! Even if you are NOT the biological parent of your child, courts will often still consider you the father if you have that role in your child's life.
  72. Tinfoil Hatt from Dogpatch, Canada writes:
    'Carole Yeaman from Almonte (Ottawa), Canada writes: Hey Tinfoil You've (at long last) given me my first real chuckle of this week. Dave Eddie falls far short of Dave Barry; but you, Tinfoil Hatt, sound like you might be able to replace our late, lamented Mordecai Richler. Too bad it's a bit late for scraping HIS cheek.'

    Okay, I confess. I am actually a tissue smear from Mordecai's cheek.
  73. Rick C from Canada writes: Given the fact that infidelity rates are estimated to be around 50% it's probably not a bad idea.
  74. Mary Timer from Dartmouth, Canada writes: Does this Identigene help us find out if we were switched at birth? I've always thought that could be a logical explanation for the complete disparity between my personality and my family. The rest of them are nuts....Hmmmm where did he say that kit was from?
  75. C J from Canada writes: Before attacking the guys as a creep, distrustful, etc etc. Remember it takes two to tango.
    So ladies, are you sure you're not behaving naughtily at one time or another?? Stand in front of the mirror & ask yourself first, before attacking your (or other's) man
  76. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: I H Bonn, the column was meant to be HUMOUROUS. He ordered the kit AS A JOKE SO HE COULD WRITE ABOUT IT.

    Even if he were serious, there is nothing wrong with wanting to know if someone is your kid or not. Women always know it's theirs. Men have no physical way of being sure. It's an evolutionary advantage that women have always had over men. This little kit evens the score a little. Thus, it makes progressive types nervous.
  77. Cousin Voltaire from Canada writes: I find my sense of humour matches Mr. Eddie's. And I'm willing to bet $1 he had a long chat with his wife before getting this article out in print. And she, being a good sport, said sure, honey; if it helps you get your point across about paternity kits, go ahead, use my name in vain. Which explains their younger son's positive personality traits: he inherited them from his mom. Hopefully he inherited his dad's sense of humour, too.
  78. Cousin Voltaire from Canada writes: p.s. I just spent some time reading some of the comments and saw Mr. Eddie himself has responded. In reply to the doubts expressed as to whether it is him, I'll bet $1.50. The bolded, frustrated 'sigh' says it all. And anyway, his 'voice' comes through loud and clear.
  79. Monnana S from Canada writes: l h from bonn, Germany: do you know Dieter from Sprockets?
    Now's the time on this forum when we dance!
  80. evelyn robinson from Canada writes: The writer wold be staying at a flea bag hotel if he were my husband and pulled that stunt. Even if it is supposed to be humourous; it is an insult to his wife
  81. slapdash dapoint from Canada writes: and while we're beating this dead horse... what's done with the DNA samples? who has rights to access and ownership? if some company does your entire sequence, are they able to patent that?

    who are you giving you family's basic unique identity to?
  82. D K from Canada writes: Right now your DNA profile has been transferred to a US gov database. Have fun!
  83. John Doucette from Manotick, Canada writes: Daver, might as well do the family dog at the same time!
  84. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Evelyn Robinson writes: "The writer wold be staying at a flea bag hotel if he were my husband and pulled that stunt." A little defensive over this new technology are we Evelyn? I think there are more than a few women out there who just might find themselves religated to sleeping at a flea bag hotel as a result of this kit. Equality's a bi!ch.
  85. Jennifer Rollison from Canada writes: Alistair, it has nothing to do with equality. Men cheat more than women and women have no recourse such as this. If we could find all the women our husbands cheated with and give their children DNA tests, I might agree. If we did then we would have equality on this issue. Do you trust your wife, Alistair? Can she trust you? (P.S. I am not speaking of myself here for those of you wishing to castigate me, just hypothetical)
  86. C J from Canada writes: Jennifer Rollison from Canada writes: ... Men cheat more than women and women have no recourse such as this.

    Ya right. Honey, a man needs a willing cheater - I mean partner - in order to cheat.
    You must be hearing a lot of from your woman friends who are in a self-righteous mode, perhaps in a post-affair stage? ;)
  87. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Jennifer, the difference is, the wife is generally is not stuck raising kids that are not her own, at least not unknowingly. (She's pretty certain whether or not a certain kid came out of her.) She is likely not even aware of the existence of her husband's love children. On the other hand, if a man is raising a child as his own, and it turns out it isn't his, then he has been fooled into expending his valuable and limited resources on another man's genetic legacy instead of his own. THAT'S why guys might find this test useful. I'm not saying guys actually think in terms terms of "must pass down my own genes", but that is the underlying motivation behind men's suspicions regarding paternity. (In fact, it is the underlying driver for most of human behaviour. Millions of years of evolution sees to that.) Which is why this kit is going to find a market. I'm not saying that I have any doubts, or any intentions of using the kit myself. But let's face it, people are not always faithful. There are some men out there who will certainly find this tool useful to clear up some "uncertainties."
  88. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: There will be female cheaters and there will be male cheaters. The pain is real for both, but there are big differences when infidelity produces a child.

    When a wife cheats and has a child, her husband is forced to live with the product of this infidelity in his face for life if he chooses to stay with the woman. If he leaves he will be paying for his wife's fling for 20 years or more. She knows it's her child, he cannot be sure.

    If a husband cheats, the child is often never seen by the wife. If she leaves, once again she takes his money with her. She knows it's not her child, he still cannot be sure.

    In either case the result is bad for the child.

    If there's doubt, it is better to have the test early, before attachments are formed with the child.

    Only arrogant, self-absorbed women trivialize male uncertainty over paternity, and these same women are often highly anxious over much smaller issues than this relating to their partners.
  89. Jen Dobson from Canada writes: Um... show me where it's been proven that men cheat more then women. I do not accept that as fact. Everything I've ever seen has shown the rates are identical. I know alot of women like to THINK that men are worse, but that's their issue.

    I have mixed feelings about this... I don't like the idea of DNA being in a database, etc., but at the same time people definitely have a right to know if it is their child or not. You can't argue against that. And it seems a little odd to ask your wife for permission to do a test like this... if she is guilty why would she agree? Considering there are many many children out there where the father isn't really the father, I could see some value in this.

    Me thinks some women are just terrified there husbands will find out about their own infedelities. But I'm sure I'll be attacked by all the women for pointing this out.
  90. John Silverman from Canada writes: Every woman I've ever dated including my wife has been a snoop into my business. Going through my stuff, my phone, my emails, my internet history. Of course when confronted I always get the "it's my business to know" BS. It's NOT your business. You're supposed to trust your spouse.

    So for me, it would depend on my spouse. If she was the type which I just described - to snoop into my stuff - then hell yeah I'd consider a test like this. Why wouldn't I??? Isn't it my right to know?

    But if she trusted me and didn't snoop on me, I would not do this. Trust works both ways. I must prefer the trust root but a man must stand up for himself.
  91. Ursula Seawitch from Canada writes: I really enjoyed this article Mr. Eddy but I do think you should not have used your own family for the example. Don't you think your son might hear about this in 10 years time when he really doesn't want you to be his parent. Trust me they all think this.

    My oldest daughter, who doesn't resemble her father, asked me when she was a teen ager if her father was her father. She asked this even knowing her blood type is the same as her father ( although they are both O so there are a few other people around of that type).

    This reminds me of the gossip you would hear as a child around the family get togethers. So and So doesn't look like the father, was she sleeping around? I hope this I-denti-kit will get rid of that back stabbing.
  92. Anger Equals Danger from Canada writes: Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Anger Equals Danger, hope your son doesn't count on getting that child support back. Legally, the child may be considered 'a child of the marriage' (regardless of whether your son and his ex were married at the time) and he may be on the hook, not only for the first 12 years, but to 18 years and maybe college tuition besides.

    Nope, since she didn't want to put his name on the birth certificate so that she could claim a full amount of child support. (if the father is known, the gov goes after him for a portion, and her payment fromt he gov is reduced)She insisted on "Father unknown", yet milked him for the money as well. He paid by carbon copy check and kept all the coipies, or would purchase GC's for Safeway or Superstore, which coulld not be used for tobacco sales, but for anything else (baby food, diapers, lunch supplies, clothing.) Again, photocopying them before he gave them to her.

    And no, they were never married. Didn't even live together long enough.
  93. C J from Canada writes: Anger Equals Danger from Canada writes: ...
    Nope, since she didn't want to put his name on the birth certificate so that she could claim a full amount of child support. (if the father is known, the gov goes after him for a portion, and her payment fromt he gov is reduced)She insisted on "Father unknown", yet milked him for the money as well

    oh my, how low can one get??

    If both people don't have that much trust of each other, when even get together even the first place!?

Join the Conversation, Leave a Comment

This conversation is semi-moderated What is moderation? | How do I report a comment?

You must be logged-in to submit a comment — login now!

Not registered with globeandmail.com? Register now. It is quick and free.

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.