5 ms·

The genetic testing didn't cause the divorce, keeping secrets did. This is also a very good argument for honesty - it's very hard to figure out when and how yo

The genetic testing didn't cause the divorce, keeping secrets did. This is also a very good argument for honesty - it's very hard to figure out when and how you'll get called out on lies.

blueflow 12y ago
But this throws another question... why are people keeping such secrets in the first place?
- fleitz 12y ago
  Because keeping secrets generally results in more positive outcomes than disclosing them.
  - learnstats2 12y ago
    Keeping a secret/lying about subjects that are important to another party is a gamble that you won't be exposed. If the secret/lie comes out later, then the consequences are often far worse than they would have been if you had been honest. If you have lied or deliberately misled, everything you have ever said might be up for questioning.
    - fleitz 12y ago
      Now I know, and knowing is half the battle!
  - namenotrequired 12y ago
    Or rather, ...generally are initially expected to result...
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- fleitz 12y ago
  When did this supposed lie take place? It's really not clear from the story that any lie was told at all.
  - ThrustVectoring 12y ago
    If Dad knew he had a child and didn't tell Mom, that's why they got divorced and it's the lie's fault. If Dad didn't know that he had a child, and found out along with Mom, then the divorce is the fault of good-old-fashioned Puritanism. I assumed it's the first - but regardless, airing out "I had a child who was born at %date" isn't something that ruins relationships by itself.
    - fleitz 12y ago
      Withholding information that wasn't asked for is generally not considered lying. Which is why everyone is calling it a 'secret'. It sounds like the big contention was that he wanted to contact his son, not that the son existed.
      - jacquesm 12y ago
        That's tricky ground you're on there. That's usually called 'lying by omission', you are technically not lying because you have uttered no untruths but you are morally in the wrong because you are withholding information that the social contract in force would expect you to disclose.
- discreteevent 12y ago
  No, you don't always get caught or suffer the consequences. Many facts go with people to the grave and in many cases this causes less suffering to people. That's just reality. Being able to keep a secret is a valued trait often for very good (as opposed to criminal) reasons.
- VLM 12y ago
  We're getting flooded with assumptions that the dad knew he had a kid. Could have been a 1 night stand and he never knew. Of course him and mom could be super religious and swore to each other they're virgins. Or for extra stress, mom 1.0 is mom 2.0's best friend or ex roommate or co worker or something. I dated two roommates in university (not at the same time) and they both knew it, but eventually it was just too stressful and I was spun out of orbit. (edited for another possibility: One spouse thinks 18 years of child support is a great idea and the other disagrees. Not exactly the first time financial stress collapses a marriage) Another peculiarity about the story is it has a fixation on: "people discover their parents aren't their parents" Well assuming no adoption, birth mom usually is mom, although much more often her husband isn't kids genetic father. It would be quite impressive although possible I guess to discover your birth mom isn't your genetic mom. Maybe an epic fail or record keeping at the fertility clinic, I guess. Statistically it sounds much more likely you'll find out mom's husband isn't dad more than you'll find out birth mom isn't mom.
diminoten 12y ago
It's entirely possible dad didn't know about the child, right?
- TheCoelacanth 12y ago
  But in that case the child's mother caused the problems by keeping the child a secret from the father.
  - wavefunction 12y ago
    Nobody caused any problems other than people trying to assign blame for something that is blameless. Technology and information are morally neutral but what we choose to do with that information or technology is not.
NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago
Keeping secrets isn't the problem here. Whether secret or known, why should any woman want a man that would be so careless with his own offspring that they end up being adopted by strangers and searching for their parents all their life? Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who has children by another woman? Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who is apparently really bad at using contraceptives? Maybe it wouldn't have been a divorce, it just would never have been a marriage in the first place. But whatever the eventual result, the problem was that the father was a piece of shit.
- PhasmaFelis 12y ago
  > Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who has children by another woman? Are you trolling? Marrying someone with pre-existing children is so profoundly non-scandalous that it was the premise for The Brady Bunch.
  - cpwright 12y ago
    Mr. or Mrs. Brady Bunch didn't hide the fact that they had previous children or relationships. Its very possible that the father lied to the mother about having the prior relationship. Its also possible that his previous behavior had nothing to do with the divorce, and it was his current reaction. Either way, I think the author being a geneticist should pretty much understand that if you're trying to find relatives, you might actually find relatives. I tend to think this should be opt-in, but as long as both parties have the box checked, it seems like perfectly valid functionality to me.
- coldtea 12y ago
  >Whether secret or known, why should any woman want a man that would be so careless with his own offspring that they end up being adopted by strangers and searching for their parents all their life? Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who has children by another woman? Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who is apparently really bad at using contraceptives? Because in the grand scheme of things all of the above are insignificant BS, that could happen to anyone, especially at a young age, without precluding that the man/women who had that would turnup a wonderful person to be with and a good husband. I mean "why should any woman want a man who has children by another woman"? What are you, 15-years old?
dtauzell 12y ago
It said that the Dad had the child before meeting the Mom and didn't know about the child. The problems arose from the Data wanting to meet the child against the wishes of the family.
dragonwriter 12y ago
> The genetic testing didn't cause the divorce, keeping secrets did. Keeping secrets didn't -- the marriage ended as a fairly direct result of the secret failing to continue to be kept.
- fleitz 12y ago
  Great point. Full disclosure is generally the worst policy. If you fuck up and no one knows about it shut up and don't make your family go through it. It's your guilt, be an adult and live with it. 'conscious clearing' is childish and selfish.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    > Full disclosure is generally the worst policy. That's very much not my point, which is rather that the proximate cause of the result here was secrets being exposed. Of course, if secrets aren't kept in the first place, they can't be exposed, and lots of time, while not risk free, a timely voluntary disclosure can produce a lot better results than a involuntary revelation (and involuntary revelations happen a lot more often than people trying to keep secrets think they will.) There are, additionally, moral issues to consider. Concealing facts material to other people's decisions denies them effective consent, a basic fact which underlies fraud laws, but whose moral scope extends far beyond commercial transactions.

The genetic testing didn't cause the divorce, keeping secrets did. This is also a very good argument for honesty - it's very hard to figure out when and how you'll get called out on lies.

blueflow 12y ago

But this throws another question... why are people keeping such secrets in the first place?

fleitz 12y ago
Because keeping secrets generally results in more positive outcomes than disclosing them.
- learnstats2 12y ago
  Keeping a secret/lying about subjects that are important to another party is a gamble that you won't be exposed. If the secret/lie comes out later, then the consequences are often far worse than they would have been if you had been honest. If you have lied or deliberately misled, everything you have ever said might be up for questioning.
  - fleitz 12y ago
    Now I know, and knowing is half the battle!
- namenotrequired 12y ago
  Or rather, ...generally are initially expected to result...

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

fleitz 12y ago
When did this supposed lie take place? It's really not clear from the story that any lie was told at all.
- ThrustVectoring 12y ago
  If Dad knew he had a child and didn't tell Mom, that's why they got divorced and it's the lie's fault. If Dad didn't know that he had a child, and found out along with Mom, then the divorce is the fault of good-old-fashioned Puritanism. I assumed it's the first - but regardless, airing out "I had a child who was born at %date" isn't something that ruins relationships by itself.
  - fleitz 12y ago
    Withholding information that wasn't asked for is generally not considered lying. Which is why everyone is calling it a 'secret'. It sounds like the big contention was that he wanted to contact his son, not that the son existed.
    - jacquesm 12y ago
      That's tricky ground you're on there. That's usually called 'lying by omission', you are technically not lying because you have uttered no untruths but you are morally in the wrong because you are withholding information that the social contract in force would expect you to disclose.
discreteevent 12y ago
No, you don't always get caught or suffer the consequences. Many facts go with people to the grave and in many cases this causes less suffering to people. That's just reality. Being able to keep a secret is a valued trait often for very good (as opposed to criminal) reasons.
VLM 12y ago
We're getting flooded with assumptions that the dad knew he had a kid. Could have been a 1 night stand and he never knew. Of course him and mom could be super religious and swore to each other they're virgins. Or for extra stress, mom 1.0 is mom 2.0's best friend or ex roommate or co worker or something. I dated two roommates in university (not at the same time) and they both knew it, but eventually it was just too stressful and I was spun out of orbit. (edited for another possibility: One spouse thinks 18 years of child support is a great idea and the other disagrees. Not exactly the first time financial stress collapses a marriage) Another peculiarity about the story is it has a fixation on: "people discover their parents aren't their parents" Well assuming no adoption, birth mom usually is mom, although much more often her husband isn't kids genetic father. It would be quite impressive although possible I guess to discover your birth mom isn't your genetic mom. Maybe an epic fail or record keeping at the fertility clinic, I guess. Statistically it sounds much more likely you'll find out mom's husband isn't dad more than you'll find out birth mom isn't mom.

diminoten 12y ago

It's entirely possible dad didn't know about the child, right?

TheCoelacanth 12y ago
But in that case the child's mother caused the problems by keeping the child a secret from the father.
- wavefunction 12y ago
  Nobody caused any problems other than people trying to assign blame for something that is blameless. Technology and information are morally neutral but what we choose to do with that information or technology is not.

NoMoreNicksLeft 12y ago

Keeping secrets isn't the problem here. Whether secret or known, why should any woman want a man that would be so careless with his own offspring that they end up being adopted by strangers and searching for their parents all their life? Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who has children by another woman? Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who is apparently really bad at using contraceptives? Maybe it wouldn't have been a divorce, it just would never have been a marriage in the first place. But whatever the eventual result, the problem was that the father was a piece of shit.

PhasmaFelis 12y ago
> Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who has children by another woman? Are you trolling? Marrying someone with pre-existing children is so profoundly non-scandalous that it was the premise for The Brady Bunch.
- cpwright 12y ago
  Mr. or Mrs. Brady Bunch didn't hide the fact that they had previous children or relationships. Its very possible that the father lied to the mother about having the prior relationship. Its also possible that his previous behavior had nothing to do with the divorce, and it was his current reaction. Either way, I think the author being a geneticist should pretty much understand that if you're trying to find relatives, you might actually find relatives. I tend to think this should be opt-in, but as long as both parties have the box checked, it seems like perfectly valid functionality to me.
coldtea 12y ago
>Whether secret or known, why should any woman want a man that would be so careless with his own offspring that they end up being adopted by strangers and searching for their parents all their life? Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who has children by another woman? Whether secret or not, why should any woman want a man who is apparently really bad at using contraceptives? Because in the grand scheme of things all of the above are insignificant BS, that could happen to anyone, especially at a young age, without precluding that the man/women who had that would turnup a wonderful person to be with and a good husband. I mean "why should any woman want a man who has children by another woman"? What are you, 15-years old?

dtauzell 12y ago

It said that the Dad had the child before meeting the Mom and didn't know about the child. The problems arose from the Data wanting to meet the child against the wishes of the family.

dragonwriter 12y ago

> The genetic testing didn't cause the divorce, keeping secrets did. Keeping secrets didn't -- the marriage ended as a fairly direct result of the secret failing to continue to be kept.

fleitz 12y ago
Great point. Full disclosure is generally the worst policy. If you fuck up and no one knows about it shut up and don't make your family go through it. It's your guilt, be an adult and live with it. 'conscious clearing' is childish and selfish.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > Full disclosure is generally the worst policy. That's very much not my point, which is rather that the proximate cause of the result here was secrets being exposed. Of course, if secrets aren't kept in the first place, they can't be exposed, and lots of time, while not risk free, a timely voluntary disclosure can produce a lot better results than a involuntary revelation (and involuntary revelations happen a lot more often than people trying to keep secrets think they will.) There are, additionally, moral issues to consider. Concealing facts material to other people's decisions denies them effective consent, a basic fact which underlies fraud laws, but whose moral scope extends far beyond commercial transactions.