Wanaume wengi wasingiziwa watoto

[BAK]

Wanaume wengi wasingiziwa watoto
Faraja Mgwabati
Daily News; Sunday,April 20, 2008 @00:01

MATUMIZI ya kipimo cha kupima chembechembe asili za urithi katika mwili wa binadamu (DNA), yamegundua kuwapo kwa udanganyifu mkubwa wa wazazi wanawake kuwasingizia wanaume watoto wasio wao, imefahamika.

Uchunguzi uliofanywa na Ofisi ya Mkemia Mkuu wa Serikali (GCLA) umeonyesha kuwa katika kipindi cha 2006/2007, kesi 209 zilipokewa na ofisa huyo na kupimwa DNA zilionyesha kuwa kati ya wanaume 98, sawa na asilimia 47 au nusu ya waliofika hapo walisingiziwa kuwa baba.

Katika uchunguzi huo wanaume 111, sawa na asilimia 53 ambao walikuwa wakikataa kwamba watoto siyo wao waliumbuka baada ya vipimo vya damu kubaini watoto hao ni wao.

Mkemia Mkuu wa Serikali Dk. Ernest Mashimba aliiambia HabariLeo mwishoni mwa wiki kuwa hata hivyo kumekuwa na mabadiliko katika idadi ya wanaume wanaokuta watoto si wao ikilinganishwa na mwaka uliopita ambao wanaume 150 kati ya 250 waliopimwa ili kuhakiki ubaba wao kubainika kwamba walikuwa wakisingiziwa baba wa watoto.

Mashimba alisema katika mwaka huo (2005/2006) wanaume 100 ambao walikuwa wakikataa watoto waligundua kwamba ni wao baada ya kipimo hicho. Alisema hivi sasa kuna mwamko mkubwa miongoni mwa wazazi kupima DNA na imesaidia wazazi kuweza kufahamu kama watoto wanaowalea ni wa kwao au la.

“Ni changamoto kubwa wakati mwingine tunapokea wazazi wenye miaka 70 na watoto wenye miaka 40, inabidi uwape ushauri nasaha kabla ya kupima ili wasigombane,” alisema Mashimba.

Alisema wazazi wanaotaka kupima DNA wanashauriwa kupitia mahakamani au Ofisi za Ustawi wa Jamii ili ofisi yake iweze kutoa majibu ya vipimo kwa taasisi hizo badala ya kuwapa wazazi wenyewe.

Mashimba alisema mtambo huo wa DNA pia umesaidia kuweza kugundua majambazi na kuwaachia huru watu ambao walishukiwa kuwa majambazi. Kwa 2006/2007 watu 24 walipimwa kati yake 15 walionekana hawana hatia.

Alisema gharama ya kupima sampuli za mtoto na mzazi mmoja ni Sh 200,000, na matokeo ya DNA hizo hutolewa ndani ya wiki mbili ili kutoa nafasi kwa mashine hiyo kukusanya sampuli zisizopungua 96 kabla ya kupima.

Hata hivyo Mashimba alisema pamoja na mtambo huo kusaidia wazazi na polisi kugundua wahalifu, kuna changamoto ya kutengeneza sheria ambazo zitasaidia kutoa mwongozo wa DNA.

Mfano alisema kuwapo kwa miongozo itakayofuatwa ya uchunguzi wa DNA bila kuathiri haki na usiri wa wahusika, kudhibiti uchunguzi holela wa DNA na kuepusha utumiaji mbaya wa matokeo ya DNA.

 

[watumishi]

Hii inaonyesha jinsi wanawake wetu wasivyo waaminifu,lakini pia inavyoonyesha jinsi tatizo hili lilivyokubwa kwani takwimu hizi asilimia kubwa ni za mijini tu,nawaomba wanaume wenzangu tuutumie sawasawa mtambo wa DNA ili kurudisha nidhamu

 

[Kana-Ka-Nsungu]

Gharama za upimaji ziko juu sana na huu ufisadi wa kike utaendelea kwa watu wenye kipato cha chini na huko ndiko kwenye foul play nyingi.
Hakyanani, nimeamini baba yako anayemjua ni mama yako tu!

 

[BAK]

Gharama za upimaji ziko juu sana na huu ufisadi wa kike utaendelea kwa watu wenye kipato cha chini na huko ndiko kwenye foul play nyingi.
Hakyanani, nimeamini baba yako anayemjua ni mama yako tu!

Wakati mwingine hata akina mama pia hawajui. Kuna kipindi kwenye TV ambacho akina mama huenda kuwakokota wanaume wanaodhania wamewatia mimba ili wawajibike. Hivyo hufanya DNA test na asilimia kubwa huambiwa YOU ARE NOT THE FATHER!

 

[Single D]

Hizo mashine za Kupima DNA zitawaletea watu magonjwa ya moyo.

Na waathirika wakubwa wanakuwa watoto baada ya kubainika kulikuwa na cheating.Wanaume wengi akigundua mtoto si damu yake hupoteza mapenzi kwa mtoto.Nimeshuhudia dada wa kibantu mmewe mwafrika halisi lakini wamezaa kitoto kama kichina na imeleta mtafaruku mkubwa wakati hata hiyo DNA hawakuwahi kupima.

Inabidi itolewe elimu kubwa sana tena kwa miaka kadhaa ili wahusika wawe na guts za kubeba un expected.Bila hivo mtu atapoteza oksijeni akipokea matokeo asiyotajiria

 

[BAK]

By Tom Jackman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, August 21, 2005; Page C01

Washington hairdresser Andre Chreky gladly agreed to a DNA test when a former employee hit him with a paternity suit.

The claim was absurd, Chreky said he remembers thinking. He had stopped dating the woman years before she gave birth to the boy, now a teenager. This would all be over soon. DNA doesn't lie.

A former employee sought, and won, child support from Andre Chreky, who denied being the father. After a two-year fight, Chreky won his appeal. (By Lois Raimondo -- The Washington Post)
The results were back in a month, on a two-page report from Laboratory Corp. of America, or LabCorp, one of the largest paternity testers in the country and the state of Virginia's exclusive contractor: "The probability of paternity is 99.99 percent."

"It's crazy," Chreky, 50, who lives with his wife and two children in Great Falls, recalled saying. "We need to take this to battle."

The fight lasted two years. When it ended in May, Fairfax County Circuit Court Judge David T. Stitt not only ruled in Chreky's favor, but also raised serious questions about the reliability of DNA testing during a time when it is relied on to prove paternity, guilt, innocence and more.

"I thought LabCorp's performance was shoddy," Stitt said at a hearing in May after ruling that the state did not prove Chreky was the father. "I think something unfair happened in this case, where a citizen was put to the greatest extent to defend himself against what really has turned out to be a moving target as far as where LabCorp is concerned. . . . I'm concerned about what level of oversight is being exercised by the commonwealth of LabCorp's work."

The state is not appealing Stitt's ruling.

LabCorp handles more than 100,000 DNA paternity tests for many public and private clients every year, including Montgomery, Prince George's, Howard and Anne Arundel counties in Maryland. (The District handles its own DNA testing.) But evidence at Chreky's trial showed that the company has only five people reviewing the data and making paternity determinations -- with one supervisor testifying that he issues an average of one paternity report every four minutes during a 10-hour shift.

DNA experts say Chreky's case underscores a growing problem in the burgeoning field of DNA testing: People make mistakes, and people collect the DNA samples and perform the analysis. So, they say, although DNA is as reliable as ever as a definitive science, the people reading and analyzing that science are imperfect. And the volume of DNA testing keeps rising.

The ruling in Chreky's case came as Virginia Gov. Mark R. Warner (D) ordered a review of DNA testing at the state's criminal forensic lab after an audit detected human error in an analysis of a death row inmate's case.

Laurence D. Mueller, an evolutionary biology professor at the University of California-Irvine who has been tracking lab errors in DNA cases for years, said DNA labs "use techniques that have been automated, like Hostess Twinkies on an assembly line. Most of the time, the Twinkies are fine. But once in a while, you see a bad one."

The bad ones, some biologists say, are coming more frequently.

On Friday, the state of Illinois fired its DNA lab, Fairfax County-based Bode Technology, for failing to detect semen in 11 out of 51 rape cases. State police said the errors had not wrongly freed or convicted anyone, but they said they would have to reanalyze evidence in 1,200 rape cases.

At a July murder trial in Michigan, prosecutors acknowledged that a DNA test on evidence from 1969 matched someone who would have been 4 years old at the time of the slaying and couldn't possibly have been involved. Additional tests led to a second man, who was convicted.

A former employee sought, and won, child support from Andre Chreky, who denied being the father. After a two-year fight, Chreky won his appeal. (By Lois Raimondo -- The Washington Post)
In Las Vegas in 2001, a man spent a year in jail after being wrongly accused of committing two sexual assaults in the 1990s. Investigators later found that his DNA sample had been switched with another inmate's.

Human error "has always existed in all of the forensic sciences," said William M. Shields, a professor at the State University of New York in Syracuse who has testified in numerous DNA cases. "It exists in all the sciences."

Brad Smith, a LabCorp spokesman, said criticism from the judge in Chreky's case appeared to be the result of "some good lawyering on the challenge side."

"We are confident that we reported the correct results and that we followed appropriate procedures and good science," he said.

Smith added that he had worked in the identity and paternity testing field since 1982 and that "we've never had a result like this and or a [judge's] statement like this."

Nathaniel L. Young Jr., director of the Virginia Division of Child Support Enforcement, which pursued Chreky's paternity, said in a statement that he could not comment on the case, but he said procedures are under review.

* * *

In the late 1990s, Andre Chreky already was a star hairstylist with his own salon. But he reached new heights after he was profiled in Washingtonian magazine and it became known that his clients included first lady Laura Bush. Soon after, Chreky said, a former receptionist began showing up at his shop on K Street NW, demanding money.

"You have a child," the woman, Adele Doudaklian, 43, of Gaithersburg, told him -- a teenage son he had never met. He ordered her out.

Doudaklian did not return phone calls to her home. Chreky said he dated her several times in the early 1980s but stopped long before Doudaklian's son, Andrew Lucas, was born in March 1986.

When the paternity action was brought in early 2003, Chreky said, he thought the DNA test would end the whole episode.

Instead, Chreky was ordered to pay $1,715 a month in child support, plus health insurance premiums, after LabCorp's report said he was the father. By the time Lucas turned 18, Chreky had paid $25,000. (Even after he won the case, Virginia law did not allow him to get the money back.)

A former employee sought, and won, child support from Andre Chreky, who denied being the father. After a two-year fight, Chreky won his appeal. (By Lois Raimondo -- The Washington Post)
Chreky pleaded his case to the Virginia Division of Child Support Enforcement and then in an appeal to Fairfax Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. But LabCorp's "99.99 percent" finding was too tough to overcome. In fact, under Virginia law, 98 percent is automatic proof of paternity.

This spring, his case landed in Fairfax County Circuit Court in a full-blown trial. Douglas S. Levy, one of Chreky's attorneys, said Chreky offered to take another DNA test before his trial. But the state rejected the offer, he said.

So Chreky's attorneys hammered LabCorp's experts, mostly about what the lawyers saw as two errors on the lab report. The director of LabCorp's DNA identification testing division, Gary M. Stuhlmiller, said in a sworn report that he had arrived at his conclusions after comparing Chreky's DNA with a database of the Moroccan population. Chreky is a native of Morocco.

But at trial, Stuhlmiller acknowledged that LabCorp did not have a Moroccan database.

Stuhlmiller's report also listed 11 columns of numbers. But at trial, Stuhlmiller acknowledged that 13 tests were run, not 11. He said two were "not reportable" because they did not work properly.

Mueller, who testified on Chreky's behalf, said LabCorp should have simply rerun the tests. Instead, LabCorp omitted the two remaining columns from its report. Stuhlmiller's report did not mention the omitted tests, which he acknowledged could have precluded Chreky as the father.

And then there was Stuhlmiller's workload. He told the judge he personally reviewed 30,000 paternity cases a year, working 10 hours a day with no lunch break, 40 weeks a year, with time away for training and vacation. "And that would be 15 [reports] an hour, is that right?" Chreky's lead attorney, Glenn C. Lewis, asked him.

"Correct," Stuhlmiller answered.

Stuhlmiller declined to comment, but Smith, the LabCorp spokesman, said focusing on Stuhlmiller ignored the time spent by other lab personnel compiling the data. "I don't think it's a fair representation of the amount of time or care that we spent to make sure that was a fair review," Smith said.

LabCorp has performed Virginia's paternity testing since 2001 and charges the state $39.50 per test, or about $120 per case. State statistics show LabCorp was paid $797,000 last year and did almost 20,000 tests. LabCorp began paternity testing in 14 of Maryland's 24 jurisdictions in October and had performed about 6,000 tests through July.

Stitt found LabCorp's "99.99 percent" report "not statistically valid." Combining that with his distrust of Doudaklian's testimony, Stitt ruled that the state had "failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Andre Chreky is the father of Andrew Lucas."

How could a judge discard a seemingly definitive DNA report? Experts said it was virtually unheard of.

But Mueller pointed to a number of incidents of lab error in recent years, including allegations of problems with crime labs in Houston and Richmond.

Crime labs in Philadelphia and Minnesota were later discovered to have sent out "false matches."

"It's a terribly important issue," Mueller said. "People involved in doing these techniques make mistakes that are not involved with technology. . . . Until you get humans out of the system, these things can happen."

Chreky is no scientist. He said he just knew that this was something he needed to fight. Most people don't have the means to contest a "99.99 percent" finding. His wife, Serena, said the couple spent more than $200,000 to fight the case.

Chreky said he spent much of the past three years overwhelmed with anxiety about the case. "I've been getting up at 3:30, sleeping a couple of hours a night," he said. "I tried to keep busy. You don't want to think about it."

 

[DAR si LAMU]

Wakati mwingine hata akina mama pia hawajui. Kuna kipindi kwenye TV ambacho akina mama huenda kuwakokota wanaume wanaodhania wamewatia mimba ili wawajibike. Hivyo hufanya DNA test na asilimia kubwa huambiwa YOU ARE NOT THE FATHER!

..duh,hii hatari kubwa! je? huu ni ukosefu wa elimu ya uzazi au ni umahiri wa ngono kiasi kwamba mtu hakumbuki jana alikuwa na nani na juzi yule anaitwa nani?

..ndio maana mila nyingine[kusini huko]mama huwa ndio ana nafasi kiukoo[jina la ukoo ni la mama]. simply kwa sababu anayejua baba wa mtoto ni mama na mtoto always ni damu ya mama,lakini si lazima iwe ya huyo baba!

..taratibu lakini,msikimbilie kupima tu. unaweza kukuta unasaidiwa kazi iliyokushinda!. kwa ufupi,unatunziwa heshima!

 

[Kisura]

..duh,hii hatari kubwa! je? huu ni ukosefu wa elimu ya uzazi au ni umahiri wa ngono kiasi kwamba mtu hakumbuki jana alikuwa na nani na juzi yule anaitwa nani?

Si kwamba hakumbuki jina, ni kwamba hajui kati ya wale kadhaa aliokula nao uroda siku zile/ile aliyokuwa ana-ovulate ni yupi haswaa aliyeipatia na kufunga goli.

 

[Kithuku]

Lakini hii ripoti ya mkemia mkuu wa serikali haina uwakilishi unaokubalika kitafiti na kitakwimu, ina kitu tunaita "selection bias" kwa kuwa tayari hao waliopimwa kulikuwa na mashaka kuhusu paternity, kwa hiyo si sahihi kujumlisha (generalize) matokeo hayo kwa wanaume au wanawake wote. Utafiti huo ungeweza kuwa generalizable kama angechukua random sample bila kujali kuna tuhuma au la, aingie tu mtaani huko atafute watoto randomly na wazazi wao apime DNA, hapo angeweza kusema ni asilimia ngapi ya wanaume au wanawake hudanganywa au kudanganya katika masuala hayo. Tafsiri sahihi ya matokeo aliyotoa mkemia mkuu ingekuwa "asilimia 47 ya wanaume kwenye matukio ya disputed paternity si baba wa watoto wahusika" au maneno ya namna hiyo. Na haya wala si matokeo ya kushtua hata kidogo kwa sababu tangu mwanzo kulikuwa na mashaka hata kabla ya kipimo, kwa hesabu za kawaida za probability bado chance za kuwa baba halisi katika kesi hizo zilikuwa 50% (na 47% ni karibu sana na 50%). Ingekuwa kiwango hicho kimepatikana kwa watu ambao hawakuwa na wasiwasi wowote, yaani hakukuwa na kesi wala malalamiko, basi hiyo hakika ingekuwa tishio. Nabashiri kuwa angetumia random sampling inayowahusisha hata wasiokuwa na malalamiko hiyo asilimia itapungua sana.

 

[mtozwaushuru]

tujaribu kuwa realistic hapa. hivi hao wanawake wanafall victims kwa kuwa wanabeba mimba na kuzaa? Kama ni issue ya cheating wanaume tunaongoza! If we were to carry the pregnancies instead of the women mbona hizo maternity test results zingezua tafrani! Ama ingekuwa tu ngoma draw au wanaume tungeshinda mbili moja. Ni kweli kwamba cheating is unacceptable lakini tusiwavictimize wenzetu kihivyo!!!!!

 

[masssaiboi]

wakina mama siyo waaminifu kabisa, haijalishi unampenda na kumuamini kiasi gani, naomba weka imani kwake 95% tu na hizo 5% ziwe za incase kuna tatizo.
Nilikuwa na demu wangu akapata mimba akalazimisha ttoe kisa hatuna ndoa, then tukaja tofautiana bdae tukatengana na kila mtu akaenda kivyake. siku moja akasikia nimepata mchumba na nimeshalipa mahari akanijia akilia sana turudiane kwani tumetoka mbali, nilitaka kukubali kwani nilimpendaga sana tu ila baada ya kufikiria vizuri nikamkatalia. Nikaendelea na mambo yangu ya harusi, nikiwa honeymoon rafiki yangu akanitaarifu kuwa yule demu ana mimba kubwa tu na atajifungua karibuni.
UKWELI NILIMCHUKIA HUYO DADA NA SITAKI WALA SITEGEMEI KUKUTANA NAYE TENA KWANI ALITAKA KUNIKAMATISHA MIMBA YA MTU HUKU AKIJUA WAZI NA INAELEKEA HATA ILE ALIYOTOA NIKIWA NAYE HAIKUWA YANGU, TOKA HAPO NIKASEMA HATA MKE WANGU WA NDOA AKIJIFUNGUA DNA TEST KWA MIMI NI LAZIMA NA NIMEMWAMBIA KABISA AKAE AKIJUA HILO.

 

[mtozwaushuru]

uaminifu ni issue ya mtu binafsi. Hata hivyo inaonekana huyo mke humwamini kiasi cha kupredict uwezekano wa yeye kukucheat! sasa unamuoa wa nini?

Haya mambo ya kupima DNA kwanza yanamjengea mtoto roho ya kukataliwa ambayo itamwathiri maishani. Tusiwavictimize hawa watoto jamani maana hawakushirikishwa katika kuwazaa

 

[Thread Starter]

ila kwel mkuu BAK