Why would it need to be mandatory? Why wouldn’t it just be if requested? Not all fathers have any doubts or would even care, in some cases they may already know the baby isn’t theirs. More over- The mother doesn’t necessarily have any certitude the baby is theirs either. Babies do get switched at the hospital- although it’s rare. So in those cases it still wouldn’t be effective if the switch occurs after the test, or with the test results. Hence unless we are building a DNA database of every person from birth- dna testing should be mandatory, and when adding a father to a birth certificate, it should require the father consent or the father submit to DNA testing.
Mandatory DNA testing could be useful in tracking families with chronic disorders and tracking it so if CRISPR becomes more advanced we could edit genomes in adults to help in quality of life in people with said genetic disorders. Just a thought from a random internet person.
Technology is a rattle snake. On one end is a fun toy, but on the other is a venomous head. And of course- that venom itself can be used to help people- or hurt. There’s a huge list of legitimate health, safety, law enforcement, convenience, etc. perks to such a system- especially as the technology improved and adoption approaches or reached 100%. There is also horrifying historical precedent to suggest some of the abuses and other things we might see as negatives. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle once it’s out, and eventually it gets out. But given that the governments, corporations, and even health care providers we rely on to act responsibly have demonstrated an inability on a staggering level to be trusted with the powers they have- in reluctant to say we Shiism trust them with more. In the end though- the world keeps spinning, so it’s always more a question of when than if with these things.
if that system got put in place rates for health and life insurance would skyrocket for some people as well as it would likely be attempted to be used in court as evidence for crimes like they tried to use the bumps and ridges on the heads of people to "determine if they were predisposed to crime" and use it as evidence as a crime
I think you’re spot on @berhorien. It would also likely contribute to the wealth gap as not only another way to single out and exclude, but likely genetic developments like the ability to edit disease or recessive genes (to say nothing of if it were possible and legal to do other “enhancements” or “edits” for function or cosmetics) would not only give another advantage to the wealthy but make it easy to tell who wasn’t born to money simply by their flawed genes. It could also lead to persecution of those wanting to not edit genes- possibly being viewed similarly to not vaccinating as a public health and child abuse (not advocating against vaccines- just saying that those with “flawed” genes might be discriminated against as dangerous to society.)
My husband drinks too much coffee