Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does your friend think that she is such a bad parent that she is raising criminals?

Do you seriously think no criminals come from good parents? Good parents produce drug addicts. Drug addicts commit crimes. It’s part of the disease of needing money for drugs but frequently not having any.

Mmmmm...drug addicts are created by nurture much more than nature. Think about the behavior chain. That didn't spontaneously happen. It was nurtured from the moment of birth.

I have two cousins who are drug addicts. They were adopted as infants. At least one of their parents was an addict. Their adoptive parents raised them well, taught them how to behave, etc. They experimented with drugs in high school and that was it. Their sibling was not adopted and also experimented. She is not an addict and went to graduate from college. Nature is what got them hooked.

I am sorry but the research doesn't support any of what you're saying. I appreciate that you're trying to "protect" your aunt/uncle but you need to recognize that those kids ended up experimenting with drugs because their parents were not providing the right support and structure in their household. They also weren't monitoring the kids very well. The sibling who was not adopted (raised by another family or her birth family?) got what she needed so she stayed on the right path. If your cousins had gotten what they needed they, too, would not be drug addicts today.

You absolutely won’t be taken seriously claiming “the research doesn’t support..” and then citing no research.

Also, you’re flat wrong about “the research.”

“ At least half of a person's susceptibility to drug addiction can be linked to genetic factors.”

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/06/genes-addict

Epigenetic factors associated with intravenous drug use - https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/41/10434.full.pdf

“ Plutarch was right to say that addiction is often a familial trait — and it seems that much of this risk is carried genetically. Joni Rutter, director of the Division of Basic Neuroscience and Behavioral Research at the US National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Maryland, says that regardless of the drug involved, about 50% of the risk is genetic, within a range of about 40–60%.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/522S48a

DP here: your cited article says half a person’s susceptibility to addition is genetic. That means half isn’t. That means that good parents CAN produce kids who have addiction problems.

I’m confused by your post. Yes, of course good parents can have kids who are addicts. Good people can struggle with addiction. It’s a complex problem, much of which is caused by genetics. Trauma and a whole variety of diseases can also increase one’s susceptibility to addiction. Millions of good parents also naively gave their kids the opioids that they were prescribed during the 00’s, and lots of those kids — who had no previous addiction issues —- became addicted to opioids.

My post was in response to the PP who seemed to be claiming that research shows that addiction is caused by neglectful patently. That’s just incorrect.

I was reaction

We are saying the same thing.

You both need to learn to read. I didn't say "neglectful" parenting, I said that they are not correctly parenting the child they got. There is NO research that says that genetics is the predictor of outcomes for addictions. None. There is no research that says a child will be born with an alcohol addiction, or a theft addiction, or a sex addiction, or ... If there is, then please post it here. We'll wait.






Thought so.

The nurture element is by far the greater predictor of outcomes for a child. You don't need to neglect your child for him or her to become an addict, but not parenting your child the specific way he or she needs to be a parent will do it. Interestingly, both of you give plentiful examples of how seemingly "good" parents did not parent the child they had in the best interests of that child. So seemingly "good" parents can have a child that uses the unhealthy coping mechanism of addiction when the seemingly "good" parent doesn't provide the appropriate structure for the child.

I am a dna biochemist and genomes person. I have never done any of these tests because I didn’t know what they could be used for. I am not worried about catching violent criminals, even if they were my kids. I am worried about all the other things we will be doing with them that we can’t foresee now. I mean, next decade we will be catching who breathed covid into a room or just who was there for the last few days. Or not dating someone because their genes suggest they may go gray early. Or who knows. No thanks.

Anonymous wrote:That’s the least of my worries with my DNA being owned by a corporation.

Same. I don’t need figure out what percentage of what I am and hand over my DNA to the corporate overlords.

It’s such a DCUM thing to preemptively think about sparing your kid the consequences of a crime they may commit in the figure. Hope you’ve got a good lawyer on retainer, too. Good luck convincing snyone else that shared DNA with the kid from opting out. They don’t need a parent to match familial DNA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have daughters so I don't really worry about them committing violent crimes that I might need to conceal. If anything, they might be a victim and more info about them is probably better. I think this is some kind of #boymom agenda.

Good thinking! Ghislaine’s mom agrees!!

Jodi arias, Shayna Hubers, girls, Anissa Weier, Morgan Geyser, Michelle Carter, too. Best never watch a Dateline, 20/20 or 48 Hours. It clashes with the ostrich look.

Shanda Sharer and Skylar Neese - both murdered horribly by teenage girls.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I naively did 23 and me years ago so that genie is already out of the bag. While I regret that some.compamy has my.data forever now, if my children committed crimes that could be traced to them without a doubt, then justice should prevail. Plus, like others have said, I have first, second and third cousins already on the site so I think it's going to be difficult for people to evade this type of stuff in the future unless meaningful restrictions are.placed on the data.

Here's a simple solution: if you don't want to be tracked down and charged for taking someone else's life away- and then punished for it- then don't kill anyone

Simple.

Conversely, think of all the innocent people imprisoned for decades for crimes they did not commit due to prejudice or police corruption/ pressure to solve the crime, who in the future may never be put in that kind of horrible injustice because the DNA will clearly point elsewhere

Its a step forward into a more modern world. The same should be done for tracking viruses. It is the 21st century after all

Your rationality and logic have no place here. This is DCUM!

Anonymous wrote:I naively did 23 and me years ago so that genie is already out of the bag. While I regret that some.compamy has my.data forever now, if my children committed crimes that could be traced to them without a doubt, then justice should prevail. Plus, like others have said, I have first, second and third cousins already on the site so I think it's going to be difficult for people to evade this type of stuff in the future unless meaningful restrictions are.placed on the data.

Here's a simple solution: if you don't want to be tracked down and charged for taking someone else's life away- and then punished for it- then don't kill anyone

Simple.

Conversely, think of all the innocent people imprisoned for decades for crimes they did not commit due to prejudice or police corruption/ pressure to solve the crime, who in the future may never be put in that kind of horrible injustice because the DNA will clearly point elsewhere

Its a step forward into a more modern world. The same should be done for tracking viruses. It is the 21st century after all

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My friend was telling me she won’t do any of the dna testing because it could help implicate her kid in a crime one day. She said she’s obviously against her kids committing crimes and would love them no matter what, but also doesn’t want to do anything to help the process to convict.

What do you think?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/how-your-dna-test-could-send-a-relative-to-jail/ar-AASaSeb?li=BBnbfcL

She's in for a surprise. The possible future criminal can be tracked down through a sinlinh, aunt, uncle, cousin, etc.

+1 I initially worried after doing one without thinking about these types of implications but almost everyone else I’m related to got one so cats out of the bag!

Anonymous wrote:Does your friend think that she is such a bad parent that she is raising criminals?

Sounds like a good scare tactic to forever keep from discovery having had an affair

I don't have the stats but I'd wager that there is a LOT more infidelity in DMV than their are serial killers and serial rapists

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does your friend think that she is such a bad parent that she is raising criminals?

Do you seriously think no criminals come from good parents? Good parents produce drug addicts. Drug addicts commit crimes. It’s part of the disease of needing money for drugs but frequently not having any.

Mmmmm...drug addicts are created by nurture much more than nature. Think about the behavior chain. That didn't spontaneously happen. It was nurtured from the moment of birth.

I have two cousins who are drug addicts. They were adopted as infants. At least one of their parents was an addict. Their adoptive parents raised them well, taught them how to behave, etc. They experimented with drugs in high school and that was it. Their sibling was not adopted and also experimented. She is not an addict and went to graduate from college. Nature is what got them hooked.

I am sorry but the research doesn't support any of what you're saying. I appreciate that you're trying to "protect" your aunt/uncle but you need to recognize that those kids ended up experimenting with drugs because their parents were not providing the right support and structure in their household. They also weren't monitoring the kids very well. The sibling who was not adopted (raised by another family or her birth family?) got what she needed so she stayed on the right path. If your cousins had gotten what they needed they, too, would not be drug addicts today.

You absolutely won’t be taken seriously claiming “the research doesn’t support..” and then citing no research.

Also, you’re flat wrong about “the research.”

“ At least half of a person's susceptibility to drug addiction can be linked to genetic factors.”

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/06/genes-addict

Epigenetic factors associated with intravenous drug use - https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/41/10434.full.pdf

“ Plutarch was right to say that addiction is often a familial trait — and it seems that much of this risk is carried genetically. Joni Rutter, director of the Division of Basic Neuroscience and Behavioral Research at the US National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Maryland, says that regardless of the drug involved, about 50% of the risk is genetic, within a range of about 40–60%.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/522S48a

DP here: your cited article says half a person’s susceptibility to addition is genetic. That means half isn’t. That means that good parents CAN produce kids who have addiction problems.

I’m confused by your post. Yes, of course good parents can have kids who are addicts. Good people can struggle with addiction. It’s a complex problem, much of which is caused by genetics. Trauma and a whole variety of diseases can also increase one’s susceptibility to addiction. Millions of good parents also naively gave their kids the opioids that they were prescribed during the 00’s, and lots of those kids — who had no previous addiction issues —- became addicted to opioids.

My post was in response to the PP who seemed to be claiming that research shows that addiction is caused by neglectful patently. That’s just incorrect.

I was reaction

We are saying the same thing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does your friend think that she is such a bad parent that she is raising criminals?

Do you seriously think no criminals come from good parents? Good parents produce drug addicts. Drug addicts commit crimes. It’s part of the disease of needing money for drugs but frequently not having any.

Mmmmm...drug addicts are created by nurture much more than nature. Think about the behavior chain. That didn't spontaneously happen. It was nurtured from the moment of birth.

I have two cousins who are drug addicts. They were adopted as infants. At least one of their parents was an addict. Their adoptive parents raised them well, taught them how to behave, etc. They experimented with drugs in high school and that was it. Their sibling was not adopted and also experimented. She is not an addict and went to graduate from college. Nature is what got them hooked.

I am sorry but the research doesn't support any of what you're saying. I appreciate that you're trying to "protect" your aunt/uncle but you need to recognize that those kids ended up experimenting with drugs because their parents were not providing the right support and structure in their household. They also weren't monitoring the kids very well. The sibling who was not adopted (raised by another family or her birth family?) got what she needed so she stayed on the right path. If your cousins had gotten what they needed they, too, would not be drug addicts today.

You absolutely won’t be taken seriously claiming “the research doesn’t support..” and then citing no research.

Also, you’re flat wrong about “the research.”

“ At least half of a person's susceptibility to drug addiction can be linked to genetic factors.”

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/06/genes-addict

Epigenetic factors associated with intravenous drug use - https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/41/10434.full.pdf

“ Plutarch was right to say that addiction is often a familial trait — and it seems that much of this risk is carried genetically. Joni Rutter, director of the Division of Basic Neuroscience and Behavioral Research at the US National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Maryland, says that regardless of the drug involved, about 50% of the risk is genetic, within a range of about 40–60%.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/522S48a

DP here: your cited article says half a person’s susceptibility to addition is genetic. That means half isn’t. That means that good parents CAN produce kids who have addiction problems.

I’m confused by your post. Yes, of course good parents can have kids who are addicts. Good people can struggle with addiction. It’s a complex problem, much of which is caused by genetics. Trauma and a whole variety of diseases can also increase one’s susceptibility to addiction. Millions of good parents also naively gave their kids the opioids that they were prescribed during the 00’s, and lots of those kids — who had no previous addiction issues —- became addicted to opioids.

My post was in response to the PP who seemed to be claiming that research shows that addiction is caused by neglectful patently. That’s just incorrect.

I was reaction

^^ I’m one of several siblings. Only one sibling had an addiction problem, while none others did and parents did not. I’ve never done drugs and may drink one alcoholic drink a year. One parent never drank - ever - and one he about 1-2 glasses of wine in a year. Plenty of good parents produce addicts, with no family history of addiction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does your friend think that she is such a bad parent that she is raising criminals?

Do you seriously think no criminals come from good parents? Good parents produce drug addicts. Drug addicts commit crimes. It’s part of the disease of needing money for drugs but frequently not having any.

Mmmmm...drug addicts are created by nurture much more than nature. Think about the behavior chain. That didn't spontaneously happen. It was nurtured from the moment of birth.

I have two cousins who are drug addicts. They were adopted as infants. At least one of their parents was an addict. Their adoptive parents raised them well, taught them how to behave, etc. They experimented with drugs in high school and that was it. Their sibling was not adopted and also experimented. She is not an addict and went to graduate from college. Nature is what got them hooked.

I am sorry but the research doesn't support any of what you're saying. I appreciate that you're trying to "protect" your aunt/uncle but you need to recognize that those kids ended up experimenting with drugs because their parents were not providing the right support and structure in their household. They also weren't monitoring the kids very well. The sibling who was not adopted (raised by another family or her birth family?) got what she needed so she stayed on the right path. If your cousins had gotten what they needed they, too, would not be drug addicts today.

You absolutely won’t be taken seriously claiming “the research doesn’t support..” and then citing no research.

Also, you’re flat wrong about “the research.”

“ At least half of a person's susceptibility to drug addiction can be linked to genetic factors.”

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/06/genes-addict

Epigenetic factors associated with intravenous drug use - https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/41/10434.full.pdf

“ Plutarch was right to say that addiction is often a familial trait — and it seems that much of this risk is carried genetically. Joni Rutter, director of the Division of Basic Neuroscience and Behavioral Research at the US National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Maryland, says that regardless of the drug involved, about 50% of the risk is genetic, within a range of about 40–60%.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/522S48a

DP here: your cited article says half a person’s susceptibility to addition is genetic. That means half isn’t. That means that good parents CAN produce kids who have addiction problems.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does your friend think that she is such a bad parent that she is raising criminals?

Do you seriously think no criminals come from good parents? Good parents produce drug addicts. Drug addicts commit crimes. It’s part of the disease of needing money for drugs but frequently not having any.

Mmmmm...drug addicts are created by nurture much more than nature. Think about the behavior chain. That didn't spontaneously happen. It was nurtured from the moment of birth.

I have two cousins who are drug addicts. They were adopted as infants. At least one of their parents was an addict. Their adoptive parents raised them well, taught them how to behave, etc. They experimented with drugs in high school and that was it. Their sibling was not adopted and also experimented. She is not an addict and went to graduate from college. Nature is what got them hooked.

I am sorry but the research doesn't support any of what you're saying. I appreciate that you're trying to "protect" your aunt/uncle but you need to recognize that those kids ended up experimenting with drugs because their parents were not providing the right support and structure in their household. They also weren't monitoring the kids very well. The sibling who was not adopted (raised by another family or her birth family?) got what she needed so she stayed on the right path. If your cousins had gotten what they needed they, too, would not be drug addicts today.

You absolutely won’t be taken seriously claiming “the research doesn’t support..” and then citing no research.

Also, you’re flat wrong about “the research.”

“ At least half of a person's susceptibility to drug addiction can be linked to genetic factors.”

https://www.apa.org/monitor/2008/06/genes-addict

Epigenetic factors associated with intravenous drug use - https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/115/41/10434.full.pdf

“ Plutarch was right to say that addiction is often a familial trait — and it seems that much of this risk is carried genetically. Joni Rutter, director of the Division of Basic Neuroscience and Behavioral Research at the US National Institute on Drug Abuse in Bethesda, Maryland, says that regardless of the drug involved, about 50% of the risk is genetic, within a range of about 40–60%.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/522S48a

I naively did 23 and me years ago so that genie is already out of the bag. While I regret that some.compamy has my.data forever now, if my children committed crimes that could be traced to them without a doubt, then justice should prevail. Plus, like others have said, I have first, second and third cousins already on the site so I think it's going to be difficult for people to evade this type of stuff in the future unless meaningful restrictions are.placed on the data.