Pursuing truth

[Zigner]

You know how they do a covid test? It is not a cheek swab. It goes up the news to tickle your brain.

I've tested twice - both were cheek swabs.

 

[Ohiogal]

I've tested twice - both were cheek swabs.

Everywhere around here and on the internet says it is through the nasal cavity.

 

[Zigner]

Everywhere around here and on the internet says it is through the nasal cavity.

I believe that's the most common - but at Dodger Stadium in L.A., they were doing (are doing?) the nasal swabs.
EDIT: I can only speak about my experience, of course

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

You know how they do a covid test? It is not a cheek swab. It goes up the news to tickle your brain.

I know that but a 12-year-old with no reason to belive otherwise wouldn't give it a second thought when they also needed a cheek swab and I'd be willing to bet you could get lots of DNA when they tickle your brain.

 

[zddoodah]

I have been losing sleep over if this child is mine or not for a while now and am scared to try to figure out if she is.

So...this kid is 12 years old and you're only now losing sleep about this? When and how did you find out that this child exists, and why are you only now pondering these issues?

How do I go about getting a DNA test if mom is very against it and has asked me not to contact her after originally asking her if the child was mine.

You probably don't. Unless you can get a court order, it's totally up to the mother and, if there is one who has been legally determined, the father.

 

[stealth2]

You know how they do a covid test? It is not a cheek swab. It goes up the news to tickle your brain.

But would a 12yo know that?

 

[Zigner]

But would a 12yo know that?

I'd bet that many 12 year-olds would know. They are pretty in tune with the world.

 

[Ohiogal]

I'd bet that many 12 year-olds would know. They are pretty in tune with the world.

My kid knew it... And I realized I said news rather than nose... Arrgghhh.

 

[Taxing Matters]

I think it could be done discretely enough that mom wouldn't have to broach that discussion with the child unless DNA proves that the OP the child's father.

Certainly not if the mother is unwilling to do it without the OP going to court. If the OP goes to court in NC then the child becomes a party to the case. There is no way she won't know he is claiming to be her father before the court ordered DNA test in that case.

 

[LdiJ]

Certainly not if the mother is unwilling to do it without the OP going to court. If the OP goes to court in NC then the child becomes a party to the case. There is no way she won't know he is claiming to be her father before the court ordered DNA test in that case.

Not necessarily for just the establishment of paternity. There is no need for the child's involvement at all at that point. After paternity is established yes, then the child is going to have to be made aware, but not prior to that. I think that a judge would agree that there is no need to involve her on the off chance that he might not be her father at all.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Not necessarily for just the establishment of paternity. There is no need for the child's involvement at all at that point.

Except that generally a putative father of a child born out of wedlock would in NC file to both establish paternity and legitimation of the child in the same proceeding as it is much more cost and time effective to do those at the same time than in two steps. NC courts allow the putative father to do them both at the same time; "Therefore we find it unnecessary to require that the putative father first file a paternity action under G.S. 49–14 before proceeding under G.S. 49–10 to have the child legitimated." Matter of Legitimation of Locklear by Jones, 314 N.C. 412, 421, 334 S.E.2d 46, 52 (1985). And in the legitimation proceeding under GS § 49-10 the statute requires the child be made a party to the case:

The putative father of any child born out of wedlock, whether such father resides in North Carolina or not, may apply by a verified written petition, filed in a special proceeding in the superior court of the county in which the putative father resides or in the superior court of the county in which the child resides, praying that such child be declared legitimate. The mother, if living, and the child shall be necessary parties to the proceeding, and the full names of the father, mother and the child shall be set out in the petition. A certified copy of a certificate of birth of the child shall be attached to the petition. If it appears to the court that the petitioner is the father of the child, the court may thereupon declare and pronounce the child legitimated; and the full names of the father, mother and the child shall be set out in the court order decreeing legitimation of the child. The clerk of the court shall record the order in the record of orders and decrees and it shall be cross-indexed under the name of the father as plaintiff or petitioner on the plaintiff's side of the cross-index, and under the name of the mother, and the child as defendants or respondents on the defendants' side of the cross-index.​

​

N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 49-10 (bolding added).

Even if just paternity were sought under § 49-14 (which would not be the most efficient way to proceed, but it possible to go that route), the court has the authority to appoint counsel or a GAL for the child, in which case the child will still be a part of the case and will know what is going on. And you certainly cannot guarantee that a judge wouldn't do that.

 

[LdiJ]

Except that generally a putative father of a child born out of wedlock would in NC file to both establish paternity and legitimation of the child in the same proceeding as it is much more cost and time effective to do those at the same time than in two steps. NC courts allow the putative father to do them both at the same time; "Therefore we find it unnecessary to require that the putative father first file a paternity action under G.S. 49–14 before proceeding under G.S. 49–10 to have the child legitimated." Matter of Legitimation of Locklear by Jones, 314 N.C. 412, 421, 334 S.E.2d 46, 52 (1985). And in the legitimation proceeding under GS § 49-10 the statute requires the child be made a party to the case:

The putative father of any child born out of wedlock, whether such father resides in North Carolina or not, may apply by a verified written petition, filed in a special proceeding in the superior court of the county in which the putative father resides or in the superior court of the county in which the child resides, praying that such child be declared legitimate. The mother, if living, and the child shall be necessary parties to the proceeding, and the full names of the father, mother and the child shall be set out in the petition. A certified copy of a certificate of birth of the child shall be attached to the petition. If it appears to the court that the petitioner is the father of the child, the court may thereupon declare and pronounce the child legitimated; and the full names of the father, mother and the child shall be set out in the court order decreeing legitimation of the child. The clerk of the court shall record the order in the record of orders and decrees and it shall be cross-indexed under the name of the father as plaintiff or petitioner on the plaintiff's side of the cross-index, and under the name of the mother, and the child as defendants or respondents on the defendants' side of the cross-index.​

​

N.C. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 49-10 (bolding added).

Even if just paternity were sought under § 49-14 (which would not be the most efficient way to proceed, but it possible to go that route), the court has the authority to appoint counsel or a GAL for the child, in which case the child will still be a part of the case and will know what is going on. And you certainly cannot guarantee that a judge wouldn't do that.

I am sorry, but I still disagree. I do not believe that the court would involve the child until paternity was established, even if it was all in one case. I still believe that the mother would have the opportunity to discuss it with the child before that happened. It might be a brief window, but the window would still exist. Nothing you cited indicates otherwise.

 

[Ohiogal]

I am sorry, but I still disagree. I do not believe that the court would involve the child until paternity was established, even if it was all in one case. I still believe that the mother would have the opportunity to discuss it with the child before that happened. It might be a brief window, but the window would still exist. Nothing you cited indicates otherwise.

You'd be wrong.

 

[Zigner]

I am sorry, but I still disagree. I do not believe that the court would involve the child until paternity was established, even if it was all in one case. I still believe that the mother would have the opportunity to discuss it with the child before that happened. It might be a brief window, but the window would still exist. Nothing you cited indicates otherwise.

If wishes were ponies...