By Tongai Mutindi & Mufaro Tinotenda Moyo
Introduction
Human society has always evolved with technology. What was once unthinkable like driving cars, making video calls, or connecting across continents has become ordinary.
In the same way, DNA technology has introduced a level of certainty that our ancestors never imagined. For generations, many families lived with hidden truths, unspoken doubts, and painful secrets about children’s parentage. Today, technology can answer those questions with clarity. Yet, when the idea of mandatory paternity testing is raised, many people rush to discuss stigma, pain, and fear but often ignore the deep emotional and social suffering that many men, women, and even children endure because of concealed paternity.
Think of a man who spends his whole life caring for children and he later learns they are not biologically his. Think of a child who grows up believing one man is their father while the truth is different. Think of the man who abandons his own child because another man has unknowingly been forced to take that responsibility. These are not small issues. They cut into dignity, identity, trust, and fairness. Is it wrong to use a tool that can finally put these questions to rest? Is it unfair to ask that truth be known from the very beginning of a child’s life? These are the questions at the heart of this national debate. How many fake Moyos, fake Ndlovus and fakes Sibandas do we have out there? FAKE FAKE FAKE!!!!
The Debate Over Mandatory Paternity Testing
The rise of paternity disputes highlighted by Tinashe Mugabe’s Closure DNA Show, where a significant number, over 70% of men discovered they were not the fathers of the children they were raising has brought this discussion into the public arena. Some believe mandatory testing at birth would protect families from deception and establish clear responsibilities early. Others fear that it would violate privacy, break families apart, and give the state too much control over private family matters. Thus, the question is not only practical, but deeply social, moral, and constitutional.
Why Some Support Mandatory Testing
- Preventing Paternity Fraud
Many argue that no one should be forced into raising a child under false pretenses. A man’s name should not be placed on a birth record simply because someone says so. Supporters believe that knowing the truth from the start would protect both men and children from long-term emotional harm.
- Reducing Family Conflicts
Hidden truths eventually surface. Many domestic conflicts including violence have been linked to suspicions around infidelity and paternity. Early clarity can help avoid years of tension, mistrust, and explosive revelations later in life.
- Protecting Children’s Identity
Children have a right to know who their parents are not only socially, but in terms of identity, culture, and lineage. Supporters argue that early confirmation gives the child a truthful foundation to build their sense of self.
- 4. Encouraging Responsibility
Mandatory testing, proponents say, ensures that the real biological father not an uninvolved or misled man carries responsibility. Society benefits when every child is linked to the correct parent.
- 5. Ending Social Double Standards
In many cases, women know the truth but choose to withhold it. Supporters argue that men deserve the same transparency women expect. They ask: Which man wants to raise another man’s child unknowingly? Which woman would willingly do the same? If neither gender wants such a burden, why should the law allow it to continue?
Why Others Oppose Mandatory Testing
- A Threat to Privacy and Dignity
Some believe the state should not intrude into the most intimate parts of family life. Forcing families to undergo testing without their consent feels intrusive and potentially humiliating.
- Risk of Family Breakdown
Truth can also destabilize families. Immediate revelations at birth could trigger conflict, rejection, or abandonment. Opponents fear that compulsory testing may do more harm than good
- Stigma for Children
In traditional communities, children born out of disputed paternity could suffer discrimination. Opponents worry that mandatory testing could label innocent children and cause long-term emotional harm.
- Economic and Logistical Barriers
Zimbabwe is still struggling with basic healthcare needs. Critics question whether the country can afford universal testing, or whether the cost would fall unfairly on poor families. We suggest that the costs be effected through government subsidization of the expense on the social class that can afford will pay on their own then the poor classes can be assisted as labs will be in every province.
- Cultural Values and Family Autonomy
Many southern African societies view family as a social bond, not purely a biological one. Opponents fear that mandatory testing could weaken these cultural values, giving biology priority over love, care, and social fatherhood.
Regional Legal Perspectives
Countries like South Africa and Namibia have rejected the idea of blanket mandatory testing, emphasising children’s rights to dignity and identity. Courts in the region have generally favoured testing only in cases of dispute, not as a universal requirement for all births. These cases highlight the tension between truth and rights, and the importance of finding a balanced approach. The El Salvador parliament was recently brave enough to pass the law mandating DNA test before babies are given birth certificates. According to El Salvador’s President, Nayib Bukele, the Genetic Verification System Law,“is not a law against women, but a law against lies” , emphasizing that its purpose is to prevent situations in which men unknowingly raise children who are not biologically theirs.
Conclusion
Mandatory paternity DNA testing touches on identity, fairness, family structure, and personal dignity. While it promises truth and accountability, it also risks invading privacy, destabilizing families, and burdening the most vulnerable. A middle ground may be the most humane: Encourage voluntary testing, make testing mandatory only when there is a dispute, ensure it is accessible and affordable and strengthen legal protections for children and parents.
Truth matters but so does compassion. Technology should not destroy families, nor should emotional comfort hide critical truths. Zimbabwe must find an approach that respects human dignity while addressing the social pain caused by paternity fraud. To ask whether compulsory DNA testing is a law against women misses the point. It is a social problem affecting three people the man, the woman, and mostimportantly, the child. No gender wants to carry a burden built on lies. Men deserve truth, women deserve safety, and children deserve clarity about who they are.
As a nation, we must ask: Do we want to continue living with avoidable deception, or strive for honesty supported by humane laws? With proper planning just as COVID-19 testing eventually became affordable the cost of paternity testing can be managed. The question now is whether Zimbabwe is ready for such a significant social shift.
