This article draws on a study of the use of genetic paternity testing in the Australian context. It uses data from interviews with women in regular or cohabitating relationships whose partners exited the relationship because of a pregnancy and subsequently denied paternity. At a broader level, it explores the fragility of paternity itself in the early 21st century within the context of unprecedented sexual freedoms and transformative changes to family formation and intimate relationships. It also locates cohabitating paternity in a broader discursive context that has seen an unparalleled demonization of mothers as potential perpetrators of ‘paternity fraud’, a neo-legal exposé of infidelity and extortion of child support that commercial DNA paternity testing purports to be able to uncover.
BumpassLLSweetJACherlinA (1991) The role of cohabitation in declining rates of marriage. Journal of Marriage and Family53(4): 913–927.
6.
Commonwealth of Australia (2010) Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989. Act No. 124 of 1989 as amended. Canberra: Attorney General’s Department.
7.
De VausDQuLWestonR (2003) Changing patterns of partnering. Family Matters64: 10.
8.
De VausDQuLWestonR (2005) The disappearing link between premarital cohabitation and subsequent marital stability 1970–2001. Journal of Population Research22(2): 99–118.
9.
DraperHIvesJ (2009) Paternity testing: a poor test of fatherhood. Journal of Social Welfare & Family Law31(4): 407–418.
10.
DuncanSSmithD (2006) Individualism versus the geography of ‘new’ families. 21st Century Society1(2): 167–189.
11.
ForsteRTanferK (1996) Sexual exclusivity among dating, cohabiting, and married women. Journal of Marriage and Family58: 33–47.
12.
FoucaultM (1990) The History of Sexuality: An Introduction, Volume 1. New York: Vintage Books.
13.
FukuyamaF (1999) The Great Disruption: Human Nature and The Reconstitution of Social Order. New York: Free Press.
14.
GiddensA (1991) Modernity and Self Identity. Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Cambridge: Polity.
15.
GiddensA (1992) The Transformation of Intimacy. Cambridge: Polity.
16.
GiddensA (1998) The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy. Cambridge: Polity.
17.
GlaserBG (1978) Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
18.
GildingMTurneyL (2006) Public opinion on DNA paternity testing: the influence of the media. People and Place14(2): 4–13.
19.
GreerG (1984) Sex and Destiny. The Politics of Human Fertility. London: Secker and Warburg.
20.
GuzzoKB (2006) How do marriage market conditions affect entrance into cohabitation vs. marriage?Social Science Research35(2): 332–355.
21.
HaneyLMarchM (2003) Married fathers and caring daddies: welfare reform and the discursive politics of paternity. Social Problems50(4): 461–481.
JamiesonL (1999) Intimacy transformed: a critical look at the pure relationship.Sociology33(3): 477–494.
24.
JamiesonLAndersonMMcCroneDBechhoferFStewartRYaojunL (2002) Cohabitation and commitment: partnership plans of young men and women. Sociological Review50(3): 356–377.
25.
LeedsTL (2005) Paternity fraud, the poor person’s adoption and the interests of the child. American Journal of Family Law19(1): 20–24.
26.
LewisJ (2001) The End of Marriage: Individualism and Intimate Relations. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
27.
LewisJ (2005) Perceptions of risk in intimate relationships: the implications for social provision. Journal of Social Policy31(1): 39–57.
28.
MacintyreSSoomanA (1991) Non-paternity and prenatal genetic screening. Lancet338(8771): 869–871.
29.
Magill v. Magill (2002) County Court of Victoria, 22November2002.
30.
Magill v. Magill (2005) Supreme Court of Victoria VSCA 51, No. 3777 of 2002, 17March2005.
31.
Magill v. Magill (2006) High Court of Australia HCA 51, M152/2005, 9November2006.
32.
ManningWDSmockPJ (2002) First comes cohabitation and then comes marriage? A research note. Journal of Family Issues23(8): 1065–1087.
33.
NockSL (1995) A comparison of marriages and cohabitating relationships. Journal of Family Issues16(1): 53–76.
34.
PedersenWBlekesuaneM (2003) Sexual satisfaction in young adulthood. Cohabitation, committed dating or unattached life?Acta Sociologica46(3): 179–193.
35.
SmartC (1997) Wishful thinking and harmful tinkering? Sociological reflections on family policy. Journal of Social Policy26(3): 301–321.
36.
SmartC (2007) Personal Life: New Directions in Sociological Thinking. Cambridge: Polity.
37.
SmithD (1987) Women’s perspective as a radical critique of sociology. In: HardingS (ed.) Feminism and Methodology. Social Science Issues. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
38.
StanleySMWhittonSWMarkmanHJ (2004) Maybe I do: interpersonal commitment and premarital or nonmarital cohabitation. Journal of Family Issues25(4): 496–519.
39.
The National Marriage Project (2000) Sex without strings, relationships without rings. Today’s young singles talk about mating and dating. The State of Our Unions. The Social Health of Marriage in America. Piscataway, NJ: The National Marriage Project.
40.
TurneyL (2005a) Power, knowledge and the discourse of ‘paternity fraud’. International Journal of the Humanities2(1): 223–231.
41.
TurneyL (2005b) Paternity secrets: why women don’t tell. Journal of Family Studies11(2): 227–248.
42.
TurneyL (2006) Paternity testing and the biological determination of fatherhood. Journal of Family Studies12(1): 73–93.
43.
WaiteLJJoynerK (2001) Emotional satisfaction and physical pleasure in sexual unions: time, horizon, sexual behaviour, and sexual exclusivity. Journal of Marriage and the Family63(1): 247–264.
44.
WestonRQuL (2007) An update on partnership formation trends: what does the 2006 Census suggest?Family Relationships Quarterly6: 16–19.
45.
WhiteNR (2002) ‘Not under my roof!’ Young people’s experience of home. Youth and Society34(2): 214–231.
46.
WhiteheadBDPopenoeD (2002) Why Men Won’t Commit: Exploring Young Men’s Attitudes about Sex, Dating and Marriage. New Jersey: Piscataway.
