在中國，非親生子女的比例之所以引發關注，背後涉及的是多重社會、情感與制度層面的交錯因素。根據河南某司法鑑定機構張姓法醫披露的數據，他們每年處理約7000至8000例親子鑑定案件，其中非親生的比率穩定在22%至23%，而這一數字主要來自於「主動懷疑型」的高風險樣本，並不代表全體社會的普遍情況。事實上，若細分不同檢測動機，數據呈現出顯著差異：在主動要求檢測的一類案件中（例如父親或家庭主動懷疑孩子不是自己親生的情況），非親生比例可高達30%至40%；而在司法需求（如離婚、撫養權爭議、戶口申報）中，這一比例僅為8%至12%；至於在醫院生產後進行的例行篩查，其非親生比例更低，僅約5%至8%。這證明所謂「22%」其實只是高風險樣本的結果，不可簡單地套用於全社會人口。

然而，即便如此，這一現象仍折射出當代中國社會在家庭倫理、婚姻信任、性觀念變遷等多方面的深層問題。首先是婚姻制度與個人情感之間的矛盾。在中國，婚姻制度長期以來強調穩定與家庭價值，但現代社會的流動性與個體自主意識的提高，使得情感的不穩定性顯著上升。一些夫妻表面維持婚姻關係，實際上早已情感破裂，甚至各自有外遇，但基於家庭壓力、子女撫養、財產問題等原因選擇隱忍不離，這種情況下就可能出現非親生子女的情況。

其次是性教育與社會開放程度的不匹配。在性觀念逐漸多元化的當下，部分年輕人缺乏對婚姻與性關係的正確認識，未能意識到情感與責任的連結，導致婚外關係乃至未婚生育等問題增加。而在一些經濟較為發達、人口流動性高的大城市，這一現象更為普遍。

同時，也不可忽視的是部分地區的「男孩偏好」或家庭壓力導致女性在懷孕與育兒過程中作出選擇，包括隱瞞親子真相以維繫婚姻或爭取資源。此外，科技手段的普及，尤其是親子鑑定變得更為便捷與私密，讓一些原本被隱藏的真相得以曝光，進而使社會對「非親生」現象的關注大幅提升。

總體而言，「非親生子女」並非簡單的道德或個體問題，而是婚姻制度、家庭倫理、性觀念與社會結構變遷共同作用的結果。這一現象也提醒我們，除了技術層面的查證與統計，更需要從制度設計、教育體系與家庭文化等層面反思和調整，重建穩固而誠實的家庭關係，才能從根本上降低因親子身份而引發的衝突與信任危機。

In China, the rising attention toward the proportion of non-biological children reflects a complex interplay of social, emotional, and institutional factors. According to data disclosed by a forensic expert surnamed Zhang from a judicial appraisal center in Henan, the agency handles around 7,000 to 8,000 paternity testing cases annually, with a consistent non-biological rate of 22% to 23%. However, this figure primarily stems from high-risk samples categorized as “proactive suspicion” cases, and does not represent the broader population.

In fact, when broken down by different testing motivations, the data shows significant variation. Among cases where individuals voluntarily request testing—typically when a father or family suspects the child may not be biologically related—the non-biological rate can rise to 30%–40%. In contrast, for legal-related cases (such as divorce, custody disputes, or household registration issues), the rate drops to 8%–12%. Routine postnatal screenings conducted at hospitals show an even lower rate, around 5%–8%. This proves that the oft-cited “22%” statistic is specific to a high-risk sample and should not be generalized to the entire population.

Nevertheless, this phenomenon still reveals deep-seated issues in contemporary Chinese society regarding family ethics, marital trust, and the evolving perception of sexuality.

One key issue is the tension between the traditional marriage system and individual emotional needs. In China, the institution of marriage has long emphasized stability and family values. However, in a modern society marked by increased mobility and personal autonomy, emotional instability has become more common. Some couples maintain the appearance of a marital relationship while emotionally estranged or engaged in extramarital affairs. Yet due to pressures such as child-rearing, family expectations, and property concerns, they may choose to stay together. In such scenarios, the possibility of non-biological children arises.

Another contributing factor is the mismatch between sexual education and the degree of societal openness. While sexual attitudes are becoming more diverse, some young people lack a proper understanding of marriage and intimate relationships. This disconnect leads to a rise in extramarital affairs and non-marital births, particularly in economically developed and highly mobile urban areas where such cases are more prevalent.

Additionally, in some regions, son preference or family pressure can influence women’s decisions during pregnancy and child-rearing. In certain cases, women may choose to conceal the truth about paternity in order to preserve their marriage or secure family resources.

The widespread availability of paternity testing technology, which is now more accessible and private than ever, has also played a role. It allows previously hidden truths to come to light, thereby intensifying public attention on the phenomenon of non-biological children.

Overall, the issue of non-biological children should not be viewed solely as a moral failing or personal issue. Instead, it is a product of broader changes in marriage institutions, family ethics, sexual norms, and social structures. This phenomenon underscores the need for more than just technological verification and statistics. We must also engage in systemic reflection and reform—in areas such as policy design, educational systems, and family culture—to rebuild honest and resilient family relationships. Only then can we fundamentally reduce the conflicts and trust crises arising from disputed parentage.