“DNA test reveals fertility doctor’s dark secret, lawsuit alleges” (CNN) is about some folks who are upset 37 years after the fact.
According to the lawsuit, Ashby and her husband at the time, Howard Fowler, sought the doctor’s help when they had trouble conceiving a child. Ashby thought the doctor used anonymous donor sperm from a college student for the procedure that led to the birth of her first child, Kelli Rowlette, in the spring of 1981.
… That’s when Rowlette took an Ancestry.com DNA test and noticed that her results predicted a parent-child relationship with Mortimer. At the time, Mortimer was a complete stranger to her, according to the lawsuit.
Believing that the results were a mistake, Rowlette gave her mother access to her Ancestry.com account, according to the lawsuit.
“When Ms. Ashby was alone, she accessed the account to investigate further. When Ms. Ashby saw Dr. Mortimer’s name, she was devastated. Ms. Ashby contacted Mr. Fowler, her now ex-husband, and relayed the information she obtained from Ancestry.com. Mr. Fowler was also devastated,” the lawsuit says.
In order to be matched with someone on Ancestry.com, the website explains that both people have to be in the AncestryDNA database.
“Based on what we know from what’s been reported, and the knowledge of how our system works, it’s possible that both biological mother and father both took the test, and that the child did as well, however without further details we cannot speculate on individual cases,” Melissa Garrett, a spokeswoman for Ancestry.com, wrote in an email.
Ancestry.com said in a statement that DNA testing helps people make powerful discoveries about their family history and identity and that the company is committed to delivering accurate results.
“However with this, people may learn of unexpected connections. With Ancestry, customers maintain ownership and control over their DNA data. Anyone who takes a test can change their DNA matching settings at any time, meaning that if they opt-out, their profile and relationship will not be visible to other customers,” the statement said.
In the lawsuit against Mortimer, Rowlette and her parents are requesting an amount in excess of $75,000 plus costs, disbursements, reasonable attorney fees and interest.
I wonder if this proves the superior wisdom of the French, where DNA testing that could reveal paternity is banned (Ancestry’s DNA matching service is not available there). See this Irish Times article from 2009:
the intent of lawmakers was to preserve “the peace of families”
Meanwhile, how does our legal system process the case of this 36-year-old? Would she have been better off if she’d been the genetic offspring of someone other than the doctor? If so, she could get paid for not being taller, for example?
Maybe she can hit the doctor for 18 years of child support? Idaho family law offers unlimited child support revenue given a sufficiently high-income defendant, but the percentage of income harvested is lower than in many other unlimited states, only about 5 percent of income above $250,000 per year (the same child would be more than twice as profitable in Massachusetts, for example).
What about the college student whose sperm was not used? He has been denied a genetic legacy. Should he get monetary damages?
Paternity testing should be automatic at birth.
Back in 1981, the fertility clinics did not give a choice in the sperm donor. So everyone was being cheated out of a choice.