In April 2026, a short news item slipped into Ghana’s headlines and lit a fire: “Parliament to Pass a Bill for Compulsory Paternity Test for Every Child Born in Ghana.”
The MP behind it is Yakubu Mohammed, representing Ahafo Ano South East. His Private Member’s Bill would force a DNA test for every baby before the birth certificate is stamped. His argument is simple: “Enhance trust between partners… reduce doubts and breaches of trust… guarantee that fathers take full responsibility.”
He’s not alone. Kwame Asare Obeng – the MP for Gomoa Central, better known as A Plus – has already drafted a second bill and goes further: criminalize “paternity fraud” with prison terms for women who “deliberately impose pregnancies on innocent men,” and make DNA testing “mandatory immediately after delivery.”
What the bills actually say
Yakubu Mohammed’s Bill: Every child born in Ghana gets a paternity test. Framing: family harmony, child’s right to know, and “relief to fully enjoy family life… without any doubts.” He says “plans are far advanced” to push it through.
A Plus’s Bill: Goes punitive. Jail time for women who “knowingly name the wrong man”, plus mandatory testing at birth. His line: “Every woman who gets pregnant knows the father of her child… don’t pin the pregnancy on someone who did not get you pregnant.” He told TV the bill “has already been drafted.” Together, they would make Ghana the first country in the world to mandate DNA at birth for all citizens. Suddenly, Parliament isn’t just debating budgets. It’s debating biology. The bills didn’t come from nowhere. They ride on three waves.
1. The numbers that shock – Private labs in Accra and Kumasi report a surge in “peace of mind” tests. Blueprint DNA’s 2022 study claimed 70% of contested children tested were not biologically related to the presumed fathers, and 40% of the men were victims of paternity fraud. A Plus repeats a version on TikTok: “Out of ten women who come for DNA tests, about four do not have children belonging to their partners.” Let’s bear in mind that those stats are from disputed cases, not all births. But in politics, perception moves faster than footnotes.
2. The culture shift – TikTok and YouTube have turned paternity into a public spectacle. In February 2026, Parliament itself trended as “DNA lab” after rumours swirled around two MPs and paternity scandals. No evidence, but the mood was set: “baby daddy season” had arrived.
3. The legal gap – Ghana’s courts still lean on customary law. The Outdooring/naming ceremony is treated as an “irrebuttable presumption” of fatherhood. Once a man names the child, society and Family Tribunals expect him to maintain the child, regardless of biology. But judges are increasingly ordering DNA in maintenance and inheritance fights. The bills try to drag the law from custom to double helix.
Those IN FAVOUR of the Bills
When you talk to supporters, you hear five themes.
1. Justice for men – For too long, Ghanaian society has turned a blind eye to a silent crisis eroding families: paternity fraud. Men pay school fees, light bills, and bride price for children who aren’t theirs, with no legal recourse until it’s too late.
2. Identity for children – Article 7 of the UN Child Rights Convention: every child has a right to know their parents. Early DNA locks in medical history, inheritance, and bloodline before attachments form.
3. Cleaner courts – Family Tribunals are clogged with maintenance cases where paternity is denied. Universal testing at birth ends the “is he or isn’t he” phase and enables DSD to access support from day one.
4. Deterrence – If jail is on the table, the logic goes, fewer people will lie. A Plus frames it as a legislative hammer to protect family values, child identity and men’s rights.
5. Trust – Yakubu Mohammed insists the bill will enhance trust between partners and spouses and promote harmony by removing suspicion from the start.
Those AGAINST the Bills
Interestingly, five themes come to life for those opposed to the Bills. Critics from women’s rights groups to lawyers see a different picture.
1. Privacy and consent – Ghana’s Data Protection Act calls genetic data “sensitive.” Compelling 900,000 mothers a year to submit their child’s DNA reverses the presumption of innocence. No other democracy does this. France bans private paternity tests without a court order.
2. Cost and capacity – A DNA test runs GH¢800–2,000 privately. Nationalized, that’s GH¢720M to GH¢1.8B a year. That is half the NHIS budget, before you build labs in Walewale, Funsi or Tanyigbe. Who pays?
3. Family fallout – A negative result minutes after delivery could trigger abandonment, violence, depression or suicide. Social fatherhood is real in Ghana. Many men knowingly raise non-biological children. Should the state force that disclosure and risk collapse of functional families?
4. Criminalization backfires – Proving a woman “knowingly” named the wrong man is legally murky. Defence lawyers warn the bill could jail rape victims, women with failed contraception, or those in abusive marriages, too scared to name the real father.
5. Data sovereignty – Ghana just rejected US health aid tied to “sensitive health data.” Creating a state DNA database for every citizen runs counter to that same sovereignty argument. Who secures it? Who gets access?
The law, they say, is what the lawmaker says it is. That’s true, until the Constitution, cost, and culture answer back. Parliament can pass the bills. The Supreme Court can strike them down on Article 18 privacy grounds. Nurses can refuse to draw blood. Mothers can deliver at home. And if 30% of families reject the law, it becomes another unenforced statute, like the old seatbelt rule in trotros. As one lawyer put it: “You can legislate DNA. You can’t legislate trust.”
How do you enact a law based on the findings of a private company that has a vested interest in the outcome? Have we considered the possibility that the results being discussed were cooked by the lab to promote its business? This could be a pure marketing gimmick!
I foresee three fiery battles
1. Committee stage: Health and Gender committees will fight over cost and rights.
2. Public hearings: FIDA-Ghana, traditional councils, and DNA labs will all testify — with very different interests.
3. Election math: With 2028 coming, NPP and NDC will calculate whether “defender of men” or “defender of mothers” wins more votes.
In customary Ghana, it is said, Father is the one who raises you. Biology Ghana says, Father is the one who shares your DNA. These bills force a choice. Ghana operates a plural legal system that incorporates common law, customary law, and constitutional law. Let’s see how we navigate this legal conundrum. This is good for our democracy!
For now, the paternity test debate has done one thing already: it dragged a private, painful question – Is s/he mine? – into the Chamber of Parliament, under the lights, with the Hansard recording. Nothing happens by chance, as the esotericists say. And in politics, nothing happens without interest. The labs have interest. The wronged fathers have interest. The MPs have interest.
The question for Ghana is whether the child’s interests are best served by knowing, or by not knowing on day one. The bills are drafted. The country is talking. Parliament will decide if biology becomes bureaucracy. It is going to be interesting!
In my humble opinion, the AGAINST team has more convincing arguments than those in the FAVOR team! Ghana has more pressing issues, and a law that presumes all women are dishonest, until proven otherwise, misses the boat! By all means, get a paternity test if you have cause to suspect foul play, but don’t push this down our throats as a law!
Prof. Victor Wutor
NDC Professionals Forum
