The Politics of Paternity

I haven't posted for a while. Life has been very hectic, what with getting ready for a new baby and all. For those of you who don't know, there have been a great deal of complications with my pregnancy over the past few months that have turned our world inside out. We are no longer able to have a homebirth, and thus I have been thrown into the wonderful world of modern medicine. Not exactly what I had in mind, but since there is nothing that we can do about it, we have been diligently seeing the OB three times a week, visiting multiple specialists, and paying shitloads of money for doctors to poke and prod at me. Good times.

Our experience thus far has been much what I expected - people in positions of authority making judgments about my health and needs without so much as a second thought about consulting me about my wishes or desires. Before we even went to see the first specialist Dan and I decided that we would just present ourselves as a married couple - all of the hospitals we have been going to are Catholic. We figured it would just be easier. And, generally, it is. Except one little detail - that pesky thing called a last name. Obviously, we don't have the same last name. We wouldn't have the same last name if we were married, and many married couples don't so we didn't imagine it would be much of an issue. Boy were we wrong! Every single receptionist who has handled our insurance/check in information has become incredibly confused by this little detail. At our OB office in Lewiston it took us nearly fifteen minutes to explain to her that yes, we were married, but no, we did not have the same last name. Frustrating. When she finally figured it out she actually told me that WHEN I decided to change my name please let them know. Now, why would she assume that if I hadn't already changed my name that I would at some point in the future? This really rubbed me the wrong way, but it was Dan who jumped in and snapped at her that there would be no future name change. This really seemed to surprise her, and she dropped it.

Last week I went in to Saint Joseph's hospital to do my pre admittance paperwork at the birth center. Dan was unable to come, because he had a very important conference call that day at work. Also, he is saving as much of his vacation as possible for after the baby is born. Because, you know, in this country paid paternity/maternity leave is virtually non existant. But that is a rant for another day. So I was at the meeting by myself with a very nice nurse who was asking me all the usual questions. Medical history, family history, etc. Then she asked me if I was married, or if I was single. Now this question really irked me - because I am neither. I am certainly not single, I have been with Dan for nearly six years. And, I am not married. Why are we stuck in this binary? Shouldn't there be a third box for people who fall somewhere in between? Without really thinking, I answered married, because that is what Dan and I usually do in this situation. The reality is, we are much closer to married than we are to single.

It wasn't until I got home that I realized this might pose a slight problem at the hospital. When places like the dentist ask this question, telling them we are married is no big deal. They are never going to check, it makes things easier, and why should they care anyways? Does your marital status have some effect on the health of your teeth? But at the hospital they define you as married or single for issues of paternity. It turns out that because we are not married Dan is not the "presumed" father of the baby. So, he has to sign a paternity affadavit legally declaring that he accepts parenthood of our baby. This makes no real sense to me, doesn't putting his name and signature on the birth certificate indicate that he accepts parenthood? What further irritated me was the government website with all the necessary information about these affadavits. It was chock full of "warnings" to men about ensuring that they are 100% positive they are the father before signing anything. Now, this wouldn't bother me if married men were subject to the same requirements and warnings. The government assumes that married women never sleep around, and unmarried women always do? A marriage certificate is certainly no guarantee of fidelity, why does it come with the privelage of presumed paternity?

I often feel frustrated by this single/married binary. I know a lot of people who get married within a few months of meeting each other, and for some reason their relationship is given more "credability" than mine. Dan and I have been together for six years, own a home and lots of other debt together, and got pregnant on purpose. We have simply chosen, for various reasons, not to get married. I have a cousin, on the other hand, who got pregnant by a guy she had been dating less than a year, got married because of family pressure (even though he tried to back out the day before) and they don't live together. Yet, because they are married, their relationship is considered more committed, and more valid than mine. If this seems appropriate to anybody, I seriously question your process of logic.

So I have been stewing about this all week and I have come to the conclusion that this is merely one more form of "slut shaming" on the part of our government. This is one more example of how our government works to make unmarried women with children the "other" in society. I am not married, thus according to the government I should not be having children, and the paternity of my child must be questionable. Such a slut I am. Facepalm.