A strange incident has come to light from the UK where a man (who goes by the pseudonym PQ) mixed his sperm with his father’s (RS) to impregnate his girlfriend (JK) after the couple faced fertility issues. The couple could not afford the IVF treatment. As per estimates, by NHS, one cycle of IVF treatment can cost up to £5,000 (approximately Rs 5 lakh). The trio decided to inject the mixed sperms into JK who later conceived a healthy boy. The boy (named D in the media) is now five years old.
However, when the Barnsley council became aware D’s unusual birth circumstances, the local authority urged the high court in Sheffield to authorise a DNA test to determine the clear parentage of the young boy.
On Thursday, Justice Poole dismissed the request for the DNA test on the ground that the council had “no stake in the outcome” and D’s parents or grandparents could later take the test and tell the young boy about his parentage on their own terms.
The judge said, “A wish to uphold the public interest in maintaining accurate records of births does not confer a personal interest in the determination of such an application.” The judge said that JK, PQ, and RS’s bizarre impregnation methods had “created a welfare minefield” and added, “I cannot believe that JK, PQ and RS properly thought through the ramifications of their scheme for JK to become pregnant, otherwise it is unlikely that they would have embarked upon it.” The judge also took note of the fact that the family had always intended to keep the matter of mixing of sperms a secret.
He observed, “Without testing, his biological paternity remains uncertain but there is a strong chance, to say the least, that the person he thinks is his grandfather is his biological father, and that the person he thinks is his father is his biological half-brother.”
He described D as “a unique child who would not exist but for the unusual arrangements made for his conception, but those arrangements have also created the potential for him to suffer emotional harm were he to learn of them”. In conclusion, Justice Poole said that since the circumstances around D’s conception can not be reversed the council has no business in interfering in it now and the family can discuss this matter within themselves.
Comments
0 comment