Chapter 5 - THE OLD REPORT
Leonard found the laboratory from a photograph.
Eric had taken one.
Not intentionally investigative.
Months earlier, my mother-in-law laid the old report on a table during an argument. Eric snapped a photograph because he thought my husband would eventually need proof of what she was claiming.
Only one page.
Laboratory logo partially visible:
NORTHSTAR KINSHIP SERVICES.
Real company.
Legitimate testing service.
They offered legal chain-of-custody testing and private nonlegal testing.
Leonard contacted them through proper legal channels with my mother-in-law’s consent after her attorney advised cooperation.
The company found an order associated with her email.
Private paternity analysis.
Child sample:
anonymous code C1.
Alleged father:
anonymous code AF1.
Result:
excluded as biological father.
The report was real.
That changed everything.
Then sample types.
C1:
buccal swab.
AF1:
buccal swab.
My stomach tightened.
She had not used hair.
Where did she get cheek swabs?
The child sample was collected from a swab my mother-in-law claimed had been used during a “family ancestry game” at a holiday gathering.
No consent from us for paternity analysis.
Ethically appalling.
Possibly legally complicated depending jurisdiction and specimen rules.
Then father sample.
She claimed my husband had used a DNA ancestry kit years earlier and she preserved an unused duplicate swab.
Impossible.
Unused swab contains no DNA.
Her story collapsed.
The laboratory only knew it received two labeled specimens.
Private testing.
No identity verification.
No witnessed collection.
They tested what arrived.
The science was valid for the samples.
The identities were not verified.
That was the entire weakness of home paternity testing.
The laboratory had not said:
This man is not the father.
It said:
Sample AF1 is not the biological father of sample C1.
Who was AF1?
My mother-in-law refused to answer.
At first.
Then said:
“My son.”
No.
The new test proved that could not be true unless catastrophic lab error occurred.
Northstar rechecked retained data.
No analytical error found.
The samples simply did not match paternity.
Then child sample.
Could C1 even be our daughter?
Northstar’s retained DNA profile could be compared against the new legal test only with consent.
We consented.
C1 matched our daughter.
So she had secretly collected the child’s DNA.
AF1 did not match my husband.
May you like
There was the mystery.
Whose mouth had supplied the alleged father sample?
