DNA is considered the most reliable evidence to determine whether two people are biological parents of each other. However, DNA test results are not always accurate.
A woman named Lydia Fairchild from Washington state, USA, was once sued for welfare fraud. Although Fairchild provided photographic evidence of her parenting and her former partner, the father of the children, confirmed that he was present when Fairchild gave birth.
Yet it seemed those proofs were not enough, as the DNA test results indicated that her DNA did not match that of her children.
She was unable to find a lawyer to represent her and had to face the court alone until she gave birth to her third child in front of the court officials. Once again, the DNA of the newborn did not match hers.
Consequently, the court concluded that she must have lied somehow and decided to place the children in a social services center.
Suspecting that the court’s tests were incorrect, Lydia requested to have the tests redone at several independent laboratories of her choosing. However, the results showed no change. The DNA test results still indicated that she was not the biological mother of the children.
Fortunately, at a moment when Lydia felt utterly desperate and powerless, a savvy lawyer stepped in and took on her case.
DNA test results are not always accurate.
Prior to the case, Lydia Fairchild was just 26 years old, unemployed, and had recently separated from the father of her children when she decided to apply for state assistance in Washington state.
To qualify for assistance, the entire family had to provide DNA samples to prove their relationship. When the test results came back, the social services office called her and urgently requested her presence at their office.
The social worker and a legal representative presented DNA evidence indicating that her children were not biologically related to her. Consequently, Lydia Fairchild was committing welfare fraud by lying about her relationship with her children.
<pAt that moment, Lydia was shocked and felt immense fear. She called her parents and the obstetricians who had delivered her to verify if there had been any mix-up. However, everyone assured her that there was no case of mistaken identity.
The state then filed a lawsuit against her while she was pregnant with her third child at the time. Initially, the prosecutor requested the family to undergo three separate DNA tests to rule out laboratory errors. But all results indicated that she was not the biological mother of her two children.
All results indicated that she was not the biological mother of her two children. (Illustrative image)
Although Lydia Fairchild could provide photographs of herself with her children and testimonies from her family, the prosecution still believed she had somehow lied. At that time, the US court accepted that the DNA test results were indisputable. Therefore, they charged Lydia Fairchild with welfare fraud.
The judge advised Fairchild to hire a lawyer, but all of them refused, citing that she would never win the case because the DNA evidence spoke for itself.
At this point, Fairchild was just days away from giving birth to her next child. When the court proposed placing her two children in separate foster homes while the case was appealed, she requested the court to postpone the case until after the birth of her third child. The judge agreed and required a witness to be present when she gave birth.
Lydia Fairchild.
When the third child was born, the court continued with the DNA testing. About two weeks later, the DNA test results once again showed no genetic similarities between her and the newborn.
Even though a witness was present during the birth and watched as the doctors took blood samples from both Fairchild and the baby for the test, the judge still maintained his ruling that Fairchild had somehow deceived regarding her pregnancy.
However, lawyer Alan Tindell, intrigued by this unusual case, agreed to represent her.
When the third child was born, the DNA test results showed no genetic similarities between mother and child.
Tindell investigated and confirmed that her children were not born to her sister or brother. He even asked Fairchild if she had kidnapped them. After being convinced by her firm response, Tindell started investigating evidence against Fairchild.
Tindell came across an article published in the New England Journal of Medicine, discussing a case in Boston similar to Lydia’s. It mentioned the case of Karen Keegan, a 52-year-old mother of two sons in Boston. When she needed a kidney transplant, her sons volunteered to donate their kidneys to her. However, DNA testing revealed that she and her children did not match.
After further research, they discovered that Keegan had two different sets of DNA in her body. This was due to the fusion of two independently fertilized eggs during her mother’s pregnancy at a very early developmental stage, a phenomenon known as chimerism. The research results were published in the same year that the Fairchild investigation began, in 2002.
Lydia Fairchild and her three children.
This evidence was crucial for Fairchild’s case, and the court allowed for the DNA testing of Fairchild once again. The laboratory technicians appointed by the court began taking samples of hair, skin, and blood, but all showed only one DNA line.
Only after taking a sample from Fairchild’s cervix did they find DNA (the second DNA line) that matched her children. But the investigation was not over yet.
Fairchild’s mother had to submit her DNA for comparison, and the results confirmed that she was indeed the children’s grandmother, prompting the judge to dismiss the lawsuit.
Only after taking a sample from Fairchild’s cervix did they find DNA that matched her children.
Fairchild’s case is one of the first publicly reported instances of chimerism and has been used as an example in subsequent discussions regarding the validity and reliability of DNA evidence in court cases in the United States.
Cases of chimerism like those of Fairchild and Keegan are extremely rare, and the incidence rate is still unknown. Some researchers speculate that chimerism in humans may be as common as in other fraternal or identical twins. The prevalence of this syndrome may be steadily increasing due to the growing use of assisted reproductive technologies.
