Out of interest question

DUTR

shell_542 wrote: »

That was the first test.

But what would be the purpose of the second test, other than to just exercise your rights, and delay proceedings? You would then be another £200 out of pocket, nearer £300 when you factor in the fee of the person taking the swab.

BTW a DNA test fee is reduced if you're the second man to be tested. That worked in our favour lol not so great for the bloke who paid for the test privately, at full cost, approx £400 to be told the child he was led to believe for 8 months was his, wasn't.

no point in delaying proceedings, but no need to hurry up either, it was the PWC that had delayed the last test , however (if the highly unlikely situation should arise) the reason for the 2nd test would be the same as the 1st

Blonde_Bint

Can I chuck a cat among the pigeons here guys. Is it possible that a DNA test can be wrong? how accurate are they eg 40 per cent of the time 70 per cent of the time 95 per cent of the time? is it possible for example. man has 1st dna test it comes back positive man has 2nd dna test, 2nd test comes back negative then what?

is it possible the dna test is not always correct and that a bloke could be deemed childs father when the result was actually wrong for whatever reason? (for clarification not suggesting any tamperings going on or anything like that) or is the test 100 per cent right every time.

Loopy_Girl

If a second DNA test came back as negative when a first one was positive then the explanation would be simple - 2 different men or a mix up in the lab.

A DNA has 2 results - either negative or 99.99999999% positive. You are also given a figure of how much chance unlikely the father is i.e 30 million to 1 chance.

Now, I am sure there are people on here that would like to tar some women and say it's possible that they slept with 30 million men but highly unlikely you would agree.

Having watched a programme on DNA, it is v interesting. To get to result you have to have matching DNA from both parent. So if a child has DNA from it's mother then the DNA left from the potential father will be a perfect match.

It's not just a case of matching blood and hoping for the best hence why the tests take so long.

DUTR

Loopy_Girl wrote: »

If a second DNA test came back as negative when a first one was positive then the explanation would be simple - 2 different men or a mix up in the lab.

A DNA has 2 results - either negative or 99.99999999% positive. You are also given a figure of how much chance unlikely the father is i.e 30 million to 1 chance.

Now, I am sure there are people on here that would like to tar some women and say it's possible that they slept with 30 million men but highly unlikely you would agree.

Having watched a programme on DNA, it is v interesting. To get to result you have to have matching DNA from both parent. So if a child has DNA from it's mother then the DNA left from the potential father will be a perfect match.

It's not just a case of matching blood and hoping for the best hence why the tests take so long.

It doesn't take long, but as you say looking at the results makes 'interesting' reading, the child will have it's mothers pattern, where it differs HAS to be in the Father on all counts.

shell_542

DUTR wrote: »

no point in delaying proceedings, but no need to hurry up either, it was the PWC that had delayed the last test , however (if the highly unlikely situation should arise) the reason for the 2nd test would be the same as the 1st

Some men may want to do that. In my opinion, it would be a pointless money and time wasting task.

DUTR

shell_542 wrote: »

Some men may want to do that. In my opinion, it would be a pointless money and time wasting task.

Aye Shell, I love you all (not as much as I love Zara), but you are not a man

shell_542

DUTR wrote: »

Aye Shell, I love you all (not as much as I love Zara), but you are not a man

DUTR I just asked my husband this hypothetical question of having a second DNA test if CSA contacted us.

His reply was "what would be the point"

I said because its your right to request it again.

His reply "what would be the benefit of doing it?"

I said well it wouldn't benefit anyone really. You'd just be another £200 out of pocket.

His final reply. "No I wouldn't do it. It would be pointless and a pain in the getting it done again"

So not all men think that way.

DX2

So it's a power game If a PWC dares to close a case down and then re open it, a NRP who disputed paternity tries to take control of the situation by choosing to have yet another DNA test.

Loopy_Girl

DX2 wrote: »

So it's a power game If a PWC dares to close a case down and then re open it, a NRP who disputed paternity tries to take control of the situation by choosing to have yet another DNA test.

Exactly. It's only being done 'because I can' (stamps foot and puts lip out) and to yet again, cause the children hurt as there are no CSA payments until it is resolved. Smacks of bitterness and seething anger - which is interesting to read as it's usually the PWC that gets accused of this and I have read those very words used about a PWC by an NRP on this thread.

At the end of the day...it would NEVER happen. Whether the PWC agreed or not is neither here nor there as it wouldn't happen.

Do you think the police pursue a criminal if he has an alibi? "We'll just do a trial anyway. Because we can guv":rolleyes:

Or if the NRP dies and the child (who is now an adult) produces the DNA test papers in order to claim from the estate - "oooh now, you'll have to redo that as it's over 3 months old..." No, the test is done and that is the end of the matter. Simples:D

DUTR

shell_542 wrote: »

DUTR I just asked my husband this hypothetical question of having a second DNA test if CSA contacted us.

(snip)

So not all men think that way.

heh heh , I never said all men think that way everybody is individual, I'm sure he wouldn't pay and go either