A man who mixed his sperm with his dad’s in order to get his partner pregnant will not have to take a paternity test, despite it being unclear which man is the true father, the High Court has ruled.
Mr Justice Poole conceded when he gave the ruling that there was a “strong chance” the person the child thinks is his grandfather is actually his biological father.
If that were the case, it would mean the man he thinks is his father would in fact be his half-brother.
Mr Justice Poole said the five-year-old boy, known only as D, could “suffer emotional harm” if he were to learn of how he was conceived.
A man, referred to only as PQ, and his then-partner, JK, had agreed to mix his sperm with that of his father and inject it into the woman after he experienced fertility problems and was unable to afford IVF treatment, the court heard at a hearing last month.
Mr Justice Poole was told the arrangement was “always intended” to be kept secret and resulted in the birth of the boy.
Barnsley Council brought a legal bid over the parentage of the child after it was informed about the circumstances of the conception in separate proceedings.
Money latest: UK recession a ‘wake-up call’ for interest rate setters
UK enters recession after steeper-than-expected fall in GDP
Four-month-old baby dies after collision between van and taxi
The council asked the High Court in Sheffield to order that DNA tests should be carried out to determine which man was D’s father.
But in a judgment on Thursday, Mr Justice Poole dismissed the bid, finding the council had “no stake in the outcome”.
The judge said the family had “created a welfare minefield”, adding: “I cannot believe that JK, PQ and (his father) 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.”
He continued that the boy “is 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”.
Read more UK news
Four-month-old baby dies after collision between van and taxi
Bullying ‘deeply rooted’ in ambulance services
Mr Justice Poole said the man had an established father-and-son relationship with the child and it was up to him and the boy’s mother to “manage the latent risks to his welfare”.
He added: “It must be acknowledged that the circumstances of D’s conception cannot now be undone.
“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.”
Dismissing the council’s bid, the judge said the body does not have parental responsibility or a “personal interest” in the boy’s biological parentage.
He said: “It may wish to know who is D’s biological father, but it has no stake in the outcome of its application.
“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.”
Mr Justice Poole concluded that the family may wish to undergo a paternity test to tell the child at a later date “but that is a matter for them”.