A shocking new study has revealed one in 50 British fathers may have unknowingly brought up another man’s child – a figure lower than was previously thought.
Studies have previously suggested the figure could be as high as ten percent but in reality it is more likely to be between one and two percent, say scientists.
Oh Worstall. You keep recycling the absurd 10% figure, and people keep correcting you.
If it’s lower than previously believed then what’s ‘shocking’ about it?
Dongguan John – “If it’s lower than previously believed then what’s ‘shocking’ about it?”
British women aren’t as big sluts as first thought? Come on, all misogyny aside that is pretty shocking.
It has to be shocking, the Daily Mail are covering it.
Quite why anyone wants to earn a living doing this is beyond my comprehension, but young people are biting and scratching each other’s eyes out for a shot at journalism.
But something like 1 in 4 fathers in Britain aren’t bringing up their kids at all: hence all those single mothers.
These days if a woman wants several children with different men, she’s able to do so. The state will happily support her. There’s no need to cheat an honest bloke any more. Hence the drop from 1 in 10 (if it was ever that high) to 1 in 50.
Just in passing, because it cannot be said often enough, Melanie McDonagh is an evil and vile woman:
http://www.spectator.co.uk/2010/10/whos-the-daddy/
But otherwise, what Andrew M said.
This could be the first “fizzle” of 4-chan meme magic. They’re always going on about “my wife’s son”.
From SMFS’s link:
But no thought at all for what is best for the various selectable fathers (i.e. for the actual father, getting to participate in the bringing up of their offspring, or for the non-father, not having to fund the bringing up of somebody else’s offspring.)
I also note the use of fictional characters as evidence for ‘best practice’.
Anecdata – my son’s best mate from school is now living with his girlfriend and her baby. He had a DNA test done on the kid and it isn’t his (conception preceded a committed relationship.) Doesn’t bother him in the slightest – but that is his decision.
Meme magic is real, Richard.
Surreptitious Evil – “or for the non-father, not having to fund the bringing up of somebody else’s offspring.)”
It is worse than that because for many men it means giving up any chance of having their own children.
As I said, evil. Vile. And strangely numb to the feelings of half the human race.
@ Rob, 1008. It’s the Pratchett effect. he described journalism as indoor work with no heavy lifting as long as you’re not a sports reporter. They’ve been flooding in ever since.
“As I said, evil. Vile. And strangely numb to the feelings of half the human race.”
Thats those oh so empathetic women for you.
The older I get the more I realise that the BS we’ve been fed about women being the more caring sharing gender is just that, utter BS. Women are more affected (than men are) by the emotional states of people around them, hence the basis for the claim that they are more empathetic. But people outside of their immediate sphere, not a jot of care at all, unless that person can in some way negatively affect them personally, then there’s a huge amount of care, of the entirely self interested type. You rarely get women getting exercised about the feelings and rights of people outside their immediate family and friends group, particularly if the exercise of those rights would in some way constrain the women’s actions.. They can go hang as far as women are concerned.
Thus this statement about paternity – MM can empathise with a woman facing the choice of an absent genetic father vs a present non father partner, and whether to deceive the latter, because she can place herself in that position. And thus because it would be in her self interest to deceive the unwitting dupe BF/husband, she thinks thats OK for all women. She doesn’t actually care for any women who finds herself in that position, she’s not even that empathetic. Its just utter self interest ‘In this situation I’d want to do X, therefore all people should be able to do X, so I could if needs be’.
The deadline for getting other taxpayers to pay to bring up 3+ children for you is only 12 weeks away.
Technically the new two child rule for tax credits kicks in from April 2017, but the procreation bit needs to be in the oven 9 months before this. I wonder if any of the benefiterati will be modifying their behaviour in the run-up to the deadline.