MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Law Commission recommendations on paternity testing unacceptable to parents and children

Filed under: Child Support,General — Scrap_The_CSA @ 6:47 pm Wed 20th April 2005

Media Release

Parents for Children 20 April 2005

For Immediate Release

Law Commission recommendations on paternity testing unacceptable to parents and children.

“Last Thursday, the TV3 documentary Inside NZ: DNA and You, showed Kiwi’s that paternity fraud does happen in New Zealand. Paternity fraud is a deliberate act of dishonesty, with the clear purpose of depriving a child of her right to know her genetic and cultural heritage, usually with the hope of financial gain. Preventing this fraud is simple: free DNA paternity tests for fathers. Samples can be taken by a GP, testing done by a lab and counselling made available for all parties. Not a complicated legal appeals process in a dysfunctional discredited and closed Family Court. The Law Commission recommendations are unacceptable to parents and children.” Commented Mark Shipman, National President of Parents for Children, on the DNA paternity testing recommended by the Law Commission

The Law Commission states in its report “We acknowledge that a father cannot be absolutely certain of his paternity save for a DNA test, unlike the mother ” (5.51) then goes on to propose constructing a legal process that focuses on some theoretical notion of ethics and consent. The end cost to Taxpayers for implementation of this proposal will be hundreds of thousands of dollars if not millions, most of it going to support the family law industry. It’s unacceptable that the Commission supports keeping barriers in place that continue to encourage paternity fraud when the solution is simple.” Commented Shipman

”The potential for financial gain from these frauds is huge! If a father is earning say $45,000, lives by himself and has his daughter on the weekends, he would be paying about $5700 annually as child support for one child. Over 18 years he could pay over $100,000 in child support. That’s a lot of money” Responded Shipman when asked what the financial effect on a father a paternity fraud could have.

”The loss of family history, social and cultural identity when a child is deprived of her father and led to believe that a stranger is her father and the long term effects of this on the child must not be understated. Kids have two biological parents mum and dad, they have a right to be parented and be a part of the family and cultural life of both parents.” Responded Shipman when asked what effect on a child a paternity fraud could have.


For further information contact
Mark Shipman 021982222
James Nicolle 021800586

Parents for Children is a national organisation seeking legislative change
to enable parents who have separated to continue parenting and supporting
their children.
This requires:
1. Presumptive shared parenting
2. A fair and reasonable child support system
Parents for Children advocates that best outcomes for children of
separated parents is ongoing equal sharing of parental responsibility by
both parents.


  1. To all good caring parents,
    Another Commission Report – what a joke – Submission no.103(Burns) – Law Commission Report 2002 -‘ Dispute Resolution in the Family Court’ – False allegations. Not one recommmendation in that report has been acted on!!!!!!! This is yet another pathetic attempt by a foolish/ immoral government that is very good at window dressing a serious problem. Commissioner ‘s still recieve a healthy salary, and their insipid comments do nothing to change the sad situation. We do not need politically correct cronies making up countless,pointless bureaucratic positions as Commission’s have proved they are a waste of time and money. Take care all parents who are denied their children by a state that is guilty of child abuse!!!! -dad4justice

    Comment by Peter Burns — Thu 21st April 2005 @ 6:45 am

  2. Yes Peter,
    It’s a shameful waste of taxpayers dollars and a convenient way for politicians to pretend to be ‘concerned’ and ‘taking action’.
    Can you imagine such horrendous beauraucratic and political sitting on hands if it were women who over all these years had been victims of false allegations?
    Yeah right.

    Comment by Stephen — Thu 21st April 2005 @ 11:35 am

  3. Good grief. Sperm donors will now be liable for Child Support! Thats the quickest way to make any prospective donor to think twice. Not fair for the couples who cant concieve and cant obtain any sperm cause no one wants to donate with the overhead of Child Support hanging over them. Yikes.

    Also notice the article is focused on men being forced to partake in DNA testing. No mention of mothers being forced to allow DNA testing although its obviously implied. Just the usual focus on bad men who dont own up to their responcibilities.

    Comment by Mark Lloyd — Thu 21st April 2005 @ 1:08 pm

  4. Peter,
    Oh so true – what a joke. That our taxes are wasted on drivel like this is appalling.

    That the Anti-Clarke is such an impoverished soul and bears such hatred towards children, parents and families is a moral crime.

    It is time New Zealand stopped pandering to the 2% funny-boy/girl minority and looked at making New Zealand a “family friendly” place again. We need to look at bringing back to the fore the foundation of our society: the family unit of Mum AND Dad, the children, aunties, uncles, grand-parents, nieces and nephews.

    Vote for a positive change this year: throw the funny-boys and funny-girls out on their thinly feathered backsides this election!

    Comment by Sparx — Wed 27th April 2005 @ 3:25 pm

  5. In response to Mark Lloyd’s comment, surely the “queers and tossers” Mr Tamihere referred to will be only too glad to donate sperm? The real question would seem to be “Who would want to be the recipient?”

    The waste of time and effort on idiocy like this is criminal when our nation faces some rather large challenges that are not being addressed by “our” government. Perhaps this is because they no longer exist to govern “by and for” the people who elected them?

    Time for a big change.

    Tell everyone you know to cast their party vote for someone other than Labour, the Greens and National – perhaps the loss of large numbers of list MPs and a shift in the balance of power in parliament may bring back some moral fibre and ethics to our government.

    Comment by Ethos — Thu 5th May 2005 @ 9:16 am

  6. totally in support of this. i’m 30 years old and my father refuses to say i’m his. i know i’m his but the current law says i can’t force him to do a dna test. it has caused much anguish growing up and he promised many times that ‘when i turned 16′, ’21’ etc that he would acknowledge me… and hasn’t. only the child misses out with this sort of behaviour. really sucks that i have no power in this situation and all i wanted was a coffee with my ‘dad’.

    Comment by toni bingley — Wed 31st August 2005 @ 5:49 pm

  7. well two years has passed and i’m finally getting my fathers name on my birth certificate! Thanks to this new amendment, after a year taking it to court it’s finally happening and i’ll no longer have ‘father unknown’ on my birth cert!!! yaye! 🙂

    Comment by toni bingley — Sat 9th June 2007 @ 7:22 pm

  8. Good stuff Toni,

    S.15 of the Care of Children Act is really interesting where guardianship is the condition of law in entitlement and grounds by which to accord responsibilities, powers and rights both of the government as well any person. Yet the word “parent” has no interpretation, but the word parent has all of the rights powers and responsibilities of any guardian where that is what guardianship is modelled. This is to say that if you are the “parent” no other law applies where you can make the same demands of a guardian without the state having access to interfere with those rights. All you do is prove you are a parent – which is what? Mum and mum with a borrowing from dad?

    The stuff that is being used to govern our families and direct the parenting citizenship until these issues are publicy canvased as generally accessible, researched as such and then nationally interpreted is really pretty dodgy by my view of our constitution.


    Benjamin Easton
    (of a) fathers’ coalition.

    Comment by Benjamin Easton — Sun 10th June 2007 @ 2:04 pm

  9. I’m linking this webpage from my private blog . this has all of the usefull info necessary.

    Comment by Thomas Wisse the DNA testing guy — Mon 7th February 2011 @ 10:02 am

  10. Interesting discussion.
    Given the ludicrous misandry that it’s illegal under NZ law to use paternity testing I am wondering about something.
    What’s to say a man or group of men refuses to pay child support payments and states that they are doing so because they is no way for them to be certain they are actually the biological fathers.
    Do readers think that would force the hand of government who would in turn have to hastily adopt pro-paternity testing legislation?

    Comment by Skeptik — Mon 7th February 2011 @ 11:08 am

  11. Interesting option. I wonder if fathers are able to do this, i.e government TAKES without permission.

    Comment by Julie — Mon 7th February 2011 @ 11:00 pm

  12. Hi Skeptic- they take the money anyway, on the word of the woman. Hence my suggestion a year ago that some brave woman allege paternity to be some prominent politician- and watch HIM squirm!

    Comment by John Brett — Tue 8th February 2011 @ 7:26 am

  13. This is also a good idea. Do you really think it would be as easy as a female putting in a claim against a politician?

    Comment by Julie — Tue 8th February 2011 @ 10:30 am

  14. According to men who have been in this position, all that is needed is the word of the mother.
    So, if a woman had been putting it about a bit, she would naturally name as the father the one with the most money! (Advice here for young girls- should be taught in schools- also young boys should be send off by the schools for vasectomies without telling the parents) ;-{

    Comment by John Brett — Tue 8th February 2011 @ 10:53 am

  15. It is definitely NOT a fact that all is needed is the word of the mother. My mother tried for years to get my father to take ownership of me.. he managed to avoid paying a cent (child support, anything whatsoever) by just avoiding and denying.
    Thank goodness for the DNA test though as he tragically died a couple of years ago and everything came out. I was suddenly no longer the ‘secret’ and have found new family that didn’t even know I existed. (That’s been really awesome!). Bizarre thing though, going into your birth father’s home where you’re welcomed by everyone he knew.. being told you laugh like him, have his eyes but your father is no longer there. Thank goodness for the DNA test though otherwise it would’ve been my and my mother’s word which wouldn’t have amounted to anything.

    Comment by Toni Bingley — Mon 19th August 2013 @ 12:09 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar