Q: I advocate for mandatory DNA testing at birth. I believe it is a human right for a child to know his or her identity. The knowledge of my genetic reality was denied to me, and because of this denial, I almost died. Without mentioning about the mother or presumed father’s interest (they are irrelevant.) Can you argue against it?
A: It would depend. Do I have to pay for it? Does it involve and discomfort for baby? What happens to the sample after it is taken? If it was free, non invasive (ie from saliva not blood), and I could be sure that the sample was destroyed afterwards I would not have a problem with it. I am 100% sure who my babies parents are so it would be unecessary, but if it was required I would not have a problem with it as long as it met my conditions.
On a country wide level I would not agree with it as it is a waste of taxpayer money, I would like my tax dollars to go to more important things like education and healthcare.
Edit: the cheapest DNA test I could find was on eBay for $150 (and I worry about the quality).
So say for example because you were doing lots of them you could get the cost down to $100. There are a bit over 4 million births in America per year. That means the DNA tests would cost the taxpayer $400 million dollars per year.
So you have to ask what benifit do you get for that $400 million dollars?
Personally I would see more benifit in distributing free glasses to elderly people, or an anti drunk driving campaign or 400 million free condoms.