₦airaland Forum

Op children are a gift from God. Abortion should not be your first solution. You can get a higher paying job to handle all responsibilities. We don't solve problems by avoiding them,we rise above the problem.

There is nobody without red flags. What you do is find someone whose red flags you can manage and tolerate.

Try other apps or call a broker.

What kind of older women did you have around you growing up, your mum, older sisters, aunts and so on? Sometimes we are drawn to certain traits because they feel familiar from what we grew up around. Other times, we may be drawn to the complete opposite of what we are used to. I am not saying either is necessarily a bad thing, but it might be worth thinking about.

Campeones.... Best team so far this world cup

QuinQ:
Changing what goal post? The discussion is about all that. What it is NOT about is infidelity, paternity fraud, and such
And why are you only focused on money which is only a small part of it. The main concern is to prevent potentially destabilizing a settled family unit which will likely produce fatherless children and menace to society! If the man walks away who'd fill his obligation to that child? Is it not society and govt? ? The main aim is to prevent broken homes and allow children be raised with a father in their lives!

We are going round in circles because you keep dressing up injustice as family protection.

Let us call your position exactly what it is.

You believe that once a man has loved, raised and financially supported a child for long enough, he should be denied the truth because his continued ignorance is useful to the mother, convenient for the government and less disruptive for society.

That is not protecting a family. That is exploiting a man’s love and using his emotional investment as a trap.

You say the child may become fatherless if the man walks away. But a child needing a father does not give the state the right to manufacture one through deception. The solution is to identify the biological father and make him fulfil his responsibilities, not to force an innocent man to carry another man’s obligation because he is already available.

You also cannot declare infidelity and paternity fraud irrelevant. A negative DNA result does not fall from the sky. Either there was a hospital error or another man fathered the child. Those facts are the entire reason the result matters.

You keep calling the family settled. A lie does not become legitimate because it remained hidden for many years. Fraud does not become acceptable because the victim has already invested heavily. In fact, the longer the deception continues, the greater the emotional and financial damage.

If the child is his, the test confirms it and the family continues. If the child is not his, the test did not destroy the family. The deception did. You are blaming the alarm for revealing the fire.

And if your genuine concern is protecting children from the shock of a late discovery, then compulsory DNA testing at birth is the obvious solution. Establish the truth before years of bonding, sacrifice and responsibility. You cannot reject early verification and then use the damage caused by late verification as an excuse to ban the truth entirely.

Your argument reduces the man to a disposable provider. His consent does not matter. His money does not matter. His emotional wellbeing does not matter. His right to know does not matter. All that matters is that he remains in position and continues paying so society does not have to deal with the consequences.

That is not fatherhood. That is forced responsibility through state protected ignorance.

A man may discover that the child is not biologically his and still choose to remain because of the love and bond they share. That would be genuine fatherhood because it would be based on truth and choice.

What you are proposing is not love, choice or family stability. It is deception made convenient.

QuinQ:
Long read.
So "the test will confirm paternity and the family continues normally". How about trust for your wife. What does it say about your trust for you wife spending all that money- money u don't have - on a goose chase?

I never said I was against birth DNA test. You made that one up.

Can't you people just see that a child you've raised from infancy to teenage years IS YOUR CHILD?! Can't you see that it is pure insanity for a Nigerian man to spend 100's of thousands on DNA for such child?? Are you people okay at all?This thread's suggestion is that the state step in with laws to help the man do what he ought normally do - which is save his money and focus on raising his precious child the best he can!

You keep changing the goalpost. First it was that biology does not matter. Then it became protecting a settled family. Then it became saving money. Now it is suddenly about trust for the wife.

Trust is not proof. A wife may trust her husband and still want access to his phone or social media for reassurance. The government may trust you, yet still demand proof of identity. An employer may trust you, yet still verify your qualifications and right to work. Banks, courts and immigration authorities all require evidence when important claims are involved.

DNA evidence may also be requested in matters involving immigration, inheritance, child maintenance, custody or disputed parentage. Why does the wife not complain that she is being distrusted when DNA evidence benefits her or the child?

Yet when a man asks for certainty about paternity, suddenly verification becomes an insult, a waste of money and an attack on the family.

An innocent woman may initially feel hurt by the request, but trying to block the test through threats, tears, shame or emotional blackmail only creates more suspicion. If the child is his, the result settles the matter permanently.

Paternity is too important to be based solely on “trust me”. Important claims require proof, and no man should be bullied for asking for it.

And this money you claim you want to save is not your money. You did not earn it for him, so why are you more concerned about how he spends it than he is?

The same man could spend 100s of thousands on alcohol, betting, parties, gadgets or an investment that later crashes, and the government would not ban him from doing so. But once he chooses to spend his own money confirming whether a child is biologically his, you suddenly want the state to protect him from himself. That makes no sense.

Whether the test is expensive or unnecessary is for the man paying for it to decide. It is his money, his responsibility and his life. The government has no right to deny him access to the truth simply because you believe he should spend his money differently.

QuinQ:
You keep conflating things. We're NOT talking of anybody hiding anything. We simply know is that a family is together, bonded, raising their kids for years. All of a sudden you want "to confirm", you want "certainty", you want "truth". Why don't you ask for certainty as to whether I exist or entirely in your head or whether you are dreaming all these? Why is it only in something that can massively upend a developing child's world that you want certainty? What do you have certainty about in this world? Is everything not approximate?

You were asked to say the benefits and you really didn't say anything. Have all these people who don't know their biological fathers died?How will DNA identify the biological father without having his DNA? If the test turns out negative all you have done is upend a functioning family unit - because you want "certainty". Will you take over the care of the child? The state's business is to make it very difficult for families to suddenly start DNA fishing expeditions on a whim.

Birth DNA testing is good if you can afford it and think you need it, otherwise look at your child. If she looks like you, take her home. If she looks Chinese, reject her! Don't wait 13 years then start screaming DNA. You can do it when she turns 18!

You are still avoiding the central issue. You say nobody is hiding anything, but that is exactly what the DNA test is meant to establish. If nobody is hiding anything, the test will confirm paternity and the family continues normally. You cannot assume there is no deception and then use that assumption as the reason why nobody should be allowed to verify it.

Even the state does not simply accept your word when identity, money, citizenship, employment or legal responsibility is involved. It asks for passports, birth certificates, bank statements, biometric checks and other evidence. That is not because everyone is automatically considered dishonest. It is because important claims require proof.And what claim is more important than being told that a child is yours and that you must carry the emotional, financial and legal responsibility for that child for life?

Your comparison with asking whether you exist or whether I am dreaming is just a distraction. Paternity is not a philosophical question. It is a specific biological fact that can be tested accurately and has direct emotional, medical, legal and financial consequences.

You also asked why a man should seek certainty about something that could disrupt a child’s life. The answer is simple. The test does not create the problem. The conduct that produced the false paternity created the problem. You keep blaming the discovery instead of the deception.

That is like saying a woman should never check her husband’s phone because discovering his affairs could destroy the marriage. By that logic, the cheating is not the problem. The discovery is.

You also keep claiming that no benefits were given, even after they were clearly explained. Confirmed paternity gives the child an accurate family and medical history. It gives the man certainty before committing decades of emotional and financial responsibility. It protects an innocent mother from years of suspicion. It can also reveal that the presumed father is not the biological father, allowing the truth to be investigated.

Of course a basic paternity test does not magically identify the biological father if his DNA is unavailable. Nobody claimed it would. It establishes whether the tested man is the biological father. That information alone is important. Once non paternity is established, a maternity test can be considered and if positive, the mother would be in the best position to explain who else could be responsible.

You ask whether people who do not know their biological fathers have all died. That is another weak argument. People have survived without knowing their medical history, without education and without modern medicine. Survival does not mean the missing information has no value.

And nobody is saying a man should suddenly wake up after thirteen years and casually destroy his family for entertainment. My position is the opposite. DNA testing should be compulsory at birth precisely so that this issue is settled before years of bonding, sacrifice and emotional attachment.

You oppose testing at birth, then complain that testing after thirteen years could destabilise the child. That contradiction is exactly why routine testing at birth makes sense.

Your suggestion that a man should simply look at the child is also ridiculous. Children do not always resemble their fathers. Some look more like their mothers, grandparents or other relatives. A child can look like a man and still not be biologically his. Physical appearance is not a scientific paternity test.

Telling a man to wait until the child turns eighteen is even worse. You want him to spend eighteen years providing emotionally, financially and legally before he is allowed to know whether the basic information used to place him in that role was true.

Why eighteen? Does the truth suddenly become harmless on the child’s eighteenth birthday? Would discovering the deception after eighteen years not be even more devastating for the father and child?

The state should protect children, but protecting children does not require protecting deception or forcing adults to live in ignorance. The better solution is early testing, counselling, responsible handling of results and legal protection for the child.

Like I have always maintained, a man may still choose to raise a child who is not biologically his. That can be a powerful expression of love. But the decision must belong to him.

You cannot secretly remove the choice, call the resulting ignorance a happy family and then blame the truth when the lie is finally exposed.

QuinQ:
First of all, all the things you mentioned are beneficial to the society and families. Please tell us the benefits of unwarranted DNA testing of a settled bonded family happily raising their kids!

Also, remember that we don't know that there had been infidelity. The state's concern is to discourage a settled family suddenly going on DNA fishing expedition (as is human nature). Note the case of Davido. That DNA is still not settled because woman was alleging bribery and manipulated tests. You avoid all that, save your money, and simply and happily raise a child that knows only you as farher and is very likely your biological child!

Actually you are wrong. Women find it extremely difficult to let go of a child they breastfed and deeply bonded with. If babies were swapped at birth a woman would not swap her daughter she breastfed and raised for a "strange" child. She'd want both but if she could have only one she'd choose her daughter, not the "strange" child.

Finally, how are you sure king of your village or some rich or powerful dude did not impregnate your grandma or great grandma etc,, as kings were wont to do those days?? How are you sure you are biological descendant of your ancestors? What difference has it made??

First of all, you keep calling it “unwarranted DNA testing” as though a man wanting to confirm the paternity of the children he is raising is some criminal activity.
A settled family is only truly settled when it is built on truth. If one person is happily raising a child only because another person successfully hid important information from him, that is not genuine peace. That is ignorance being presented as happiness.

You asked about the benefits. The benefits are obvious. The child has an accurate identity and medical history. The biological father can be identified and held responsible. The man raising the child has certainty. The mother is protected from false accusations. Inheritance and legal issues are clearer. Most importantly, nobody has to discover the truth after ten or twenty years.

This is exactly why DNA testing should be compulsory at birth. There would be no sudden fishing expedition after a family has bonded. There would be no accusations, suspicion or emotional blackmail. It would simply be a routine test done at birth for everyone.

You also said we do not know whether there was infidelity. You actually made my point for me, of course we do not know. That is the entire point of testing. You cannot say a man must first prove infidelity before he is allowed to use the test that could establish whether deception occurred.

And the Davido example does not prove that DNA testing is useless. Anybody can allege bribery or manipulation after receiving a result they dislike. The answer is proper sample collection, accredited laboratories, independent testing and repeat tests where necessary. We do not ban medical testing simply because somebody may dispute the result.

Your hospital swap argument also supports my position. Whether the woman chooses the child she raised, her biological child or wants both is not the main point. The main point is that she would want to know the truth. She would not accept the government banning DNA tests because discovering the swap might disturb her settled family.

She would demand answers. She would want to know where her biological child is. She would want to know how the swap happened. Even if she continues loving and raising the child she breastfed, she would still insist on knowing the truth.

So why should a man be denied the same truth?

Like I said earlier, a man may discover that a child is not biologically his and still choose to remain the father because of the love and bond they share. That is his decision to make. But it must be remain an informed decision, not a decision manufactured through deception.

Your argument about some king impregnating people’s grandmothers is irrelevant. The fact that people could not confirm paternity hundreds of years ago does not mean men today should be legally forced to remain ignorant when reliable technology exists.
We also did not have cars, phones, blood tests, modern medicine or computers in the past. That does not mean we should reject them today because our ancestors survived without them.

And distant ancestry is not the same as a man being expected to spend his life emotionally, financially and legally responsible for a child under false information. No woman and no government has the right to decide that a man is better off living a lie. Trust is not proof.

If you want to leave then leave. Make a decision and own it. It might be for better it might be for worse. Nothing is guaranteed. If it turns out to be a bad decision, accept it and learn from it and move on.

QuinQ:
Erudite and well-said.
The thing is we haven't had DNA all this time and we have somehow managed to survive!
But this is not even the issue. The issue is not adultery or sex. The issue is upending a family's settled, happy life by going on a DNA fishing expedition! The govt ban gives them incentive not to be tempted to go down that part!

Guy below says it well:

But jokes apart, there's elements of truth here o. Because after the love and bond with my children from pregnancy to infancy to adolescent to adult, many times we've shared love, sufferings, laughter, pains and joy together then one idiot from nowhere wants to drag me to go and do DNA, as how naw? The fact is that, I will never ever want to think whether the children are mine or not. Children wey i nurture from pregnancy till now

Saying we survived before DNA testing is like saying we survived before blood tests, scans and modern medicine. The fact that people lived without a way of discovering the truth does not mean ignorance was better. So that argument does not make sense.

You are also presenting the DNA test as the thing destroying the family. It is not. The betrayal is what destroyed the family. The test only revealed it.
A happy family built on deception is not truly settled. It is only settled because one person has been denied important information about his own life. You cannot protect a family by protecting a lie and preventing the victim from discovering it.

And what exactly is a DNA fishing expedition? A man confirming whether the children he is raising are biologically his? Women investigate men’s phones, messages, locations and friendships because they want to know whether they are being cheated on. Nobody suggests banning phones so women will not be tempted to discover adultery.

The government cannot not ban the truth to discourage people from finding it. That is simply government protected paternity fraud.

The man saying he has loved, suffered, laughed and bonded with the children, therefore he does not want to know whether they are his. That is his personal choice. Nobody is forcing him to take a test. He is free to remain ignorant.
But he has no right to demand that every other man must also remain ignorant.

And let us reverse the situation. A woman raises a child from pregnancy to adulthood and later discovers that the baby was swapped at the hospital. Will anybody tell her not to investigate because she has already loved and bonded with the child? Will the government ban DNA testing so that she is not tempted to disrupt her happy family? Of course not. People will say she deserves the truth and has the right to know what happened to her biological child.

So why is truth important when a woman’s maternity is questioned, but suddenly dangerous when a man’s paternity is questioned?

Love can make someone a parent, but love does not make deception acceptable. A man may discover that a child is not biologically his and still decide to remain the child’s father because of the bond they share. That would be his informed decision.

But forcing him to continue under a lie is not love. It is fraud. The truth does not destroy families. The actions that made the truth painful are what destroyed them.

QuinQQ:
Simple resson: if you've had a child since infancy, he is your child and you're his father and you're obligated to take care of that child till age of maturity. That's how Nature intended it.
It is NOT sperm that makes you someone's father!
Other people fight for custody of children tooth and nail. You don't have to do any of that. He's your child and you get ALL the benefits of fatherhood. He carries your name, references you as his father, and if he ever becomes something ALL fatherhood glory will go to you!

OP, you are completely wrong on this.Nobody is saying sperm is the only thing that makes a man a father. A man can knowingly adopt a child and love that child completely. The key word is knowingly. He made that decision with the full truth in front of him.

What you are describing is completely different. You want a man to be deceived, denied the truth and forced to raise another man’s child simply because he has already developed an emotional attachment. That is not fatherhood. That is fraud.

Like someone said, the same woman defending this argument would not be happy if she discovered that her baby had been swapped at the hospital. Nobody would tell her to accept the child simply because she had already cared for the child, loved the child and developed an emotional bond.

She would demand the truth and want her biological child returned to her. Nobody would accuse her of being heartless or tell her that biology does not matter. So why should a man be denied the same right to know whether a child is biologically his?

Women regularly check their partners’ phones looking for evidence of side chicks, even after the man has repeatedly said he loves them and is faithful. They say they need reassurance and want to confirm that he is telling the truth. So why should a man be insulted, threatened or emotionally blackmailed for wanting confirmation that a child is biologically his?

Paternity is not a small issue. It affects a man emotionally, financially and legally for the rest of his life. It also affects the child’s identity, medical history, inheritance and relationship with the actual biological father.

This is why DNA testing should be compulsory at birth. It should be treated as a normal medical and legal procedure, not as an accusation against the mother. That way, no woman can claim the man does not trust her, no man has to beg for the truth and no child grows up under a lie.

If the test confirms that he is the father, everyone moves forward with certainty. If it shows that he is not, he deserves to know the truth and decide for himself whether he still wants to raise the child. That decision should be made through love and informed choice, not deception.

The child is innocent and must never be mistreated. But protecting the child does not mean protecting the person who created the deception. A woman should not be allowed to use tears, threats, shame or accusations of distrust to stop a man from confirming paternity.

Fatherhood through love, truth and choice is beautiful. Fatherhood imposed through deception is not.

This is a choreographed plan. The US has no real intention of ending the violence in Iran. Peace in the Strait will remain out of reach until Washington has squeezed enough money and strategic gain from this crisis. The crisis is making the US richer, so they are never letting go.

If anybody likes, let them sign 100 MoUs and 100 ceasefires, it will still amount to nothing. At this point, the best thing for Iran is not to respond even when provoked. Do not give them the reaction they are looking for. That is how to beat the US. Refuse to play the role they have already written for you.

It's still morning. They should change it to kaftan

100% agree that everyman should do DNA test. Don't let anyone blackmail you with that... “you don't trust me" nonsense. If women can check mens phones, clothes and bags for any reason whatsoever to satisfy their curiosity, then a man has every right to check if the kids he is being told are his truly belong to him. As soon as a child is born, DNA testing should be done before you put your name on that child's birth certificate.

More reasons for Tinubu to look for new areas to Tax people on.

Acquisition upon acquisition, Money na wetin again?

Who knew we would be seeing trillionaires in our lifetime. Before you know it, others will start crossing the 13 figure benchmark.


**UPDATE**

One thing people need to understand is this: wealth is not the same thing as cash. Some people say Elon Musk’s wealth is not real because it is not all sitting in a bank account. That is a poor understanding of how serious wealth works. The richest people in the world do not keep most of their wealth as cash. They keep it in ownership. Shares are wealth. Equity is wealth. Companies are wealth. Property is wealth. Assets are wealth.

If Musk wants to buy a $500 million private island, he does not need to have $500 million lying idle in his account. He can borrow against a small part of his equity, use that money to buy the island, and now he owns another asset. The same principle applies to houses, cars, private jets, yachts, companies, land, infrastructure or any major acquisition. He does not have to sell his shares unless he chooses to. His assets and net worth give him access to credit because lenders know there is real value behind the loan.
He can then service that loan from cash flow, business profits, salary, refinancing, or other income. And if his companies and investments continue growing faster than the cost of borrowing, he will still become richer overall while owning the asset.

That is the difference between cash thinking and asset thinking. Many people think buying something means money has disappeared. Wealthy people think differently. They look at assets, liabilities, collateral, cash flow, appreciation and control.

So no, Musk does not need billions sitting in a current account for his wealth to be real. His wealth is real enough for banks to lend against it. Real enough to buy assets. Real enough to attract investors. Real enough to create more financial power.
Paper wealth does not mean fake wealth. It means ownership. And ownership is one of the strongest forms of wealth in the world.

You want to advise govt. Govt that has people who have worked in security, intelligence, espionage, hostage negotiation , threat detection and assessment for years. Govt that has access to the best brains and resources to find anybody on the planet if they want. Let nobody deceive you, the reason why all this terrorists are running wildly is not because the govt doesn't know what to do, it's because they don't have the political will to do what needs to be done. They know where these kidnnapers are, they know their sponsors, they know how they get supplies, they know their forest routes. They know everything, they have the intel. But acting on it is a totally different matter.

It's really sad what's happening in SW, but what does it have to do with Bianca meeting with prisoners in Ethiopia. She went to a country as a Minister of Foreign Affairs and did her job just as she's been doing since she entered govt but you might not have heard of it because she like unnecessary publicity.
The SW should wake up and take responsibility for their lives and future. Nobody is coming to save you.

God created us in His image and likeness, and placed within us different gifts, skills and talents.
For some, that gift is the masterful touch of a ball, the dexterity, vision and brilliance that can make grown men pause, shout, smile or even cry when witnessing the genius of the maestros on the pitch.
Football is more than a game. It is art, discipline, creativity and an expression of the endowment placed in man by God .
But at the end of it all, every gift comes from above, and all glory belongs to God. Jesus loves football.

This is one of those things that become a conundrum

It is good... More grease Ma. I am sure you will find A gentleman in need of extra tribulations and suffering and he will add you to his life.

Effects of "drill baby drill". That's Trumps plan all along. Cause chaos everywhere so no one else can do business, then be the only safe place people can buy from. That's how the Trillion dollar dept gets paid.That's how American economy survives and bounces back. If you understand this then you'd understand that this Iran issue won't end anytime soon. The more Iran fights back, the better for the US.

Be the example you want your children to follow. Love and respect your partner well, and your children will learn what a healthy relationship looks like. Teach them the skills they need for life, then give them the freedom to make their own choices. Let them fail, let them learn, and be there to help them grow through every lesson. That is how confident, capable, and responsible adults are raised.

Where are the cows...?

Omoawoke:
I thought the world cared about environment and wanted us to reuse bottles , reduce waste and recycle

Since this orange head satanic monster took over America, the world has gone backward by 5 decades

Waste reduction, caring about the Environment, climate change are just guises used by the capitalist when it favours them. At the world cup it doesn't.

A girl that should have been at the forefront of AI Tech development in Nigeria even Africa If she played her cards well. Congrats to the couple.

Sports betting for a living...