Man Fails Paternity Test Because Unborn Twin Is The Biological Father Of His Son

a reply to: dashen

You can't sue a dead person so no.

Look, I know people want to read it as some sort of spooky ghost twin impregnating the mother but science is cool enough without having to make # up

a reply to: GetHyped

Ghost twin? awesome.
would make a good movie. Guy hears voices, but its really his absorbed twin.
Also, technically his wife cheated with his brother.

a reply to: GetHyped

The person was the biological father.

Yet the genes of his brother were passed on. The test that proves wether one is a biological father or not, showed that he is not.

a parent who has conceived (biological mother) or sired (biological father) rather than adopted a child and whose Genes are therefore transmitted to the child.

dictionary.reference.com...

Off course, normally the person physically making the sperm deposit is passing on his genes and is considered the biological father.

What you are saying is that he is the biological father because he was the one having sex.

a reply to: OHTheHumanity

It's the same person. The "brother" doesn't exist. The person in question has a mixture of his and his brother's DNA. That's all.

How can a non-existent entity be the father of a child?

I know it's not as interesting as "SPOOKY SPACE GHOST IMPREGNATES MOTHER" as a narrative but hey.

a reply to: GetHyped

I know it's not as interesting as "SPOOKY SPACE GHOST IMPREGNATES MOTHER" as a narrative but hey.

You are the only one interpreting it like that.......

It's the same person. The "brother" doesn't exist. The person in question has a mixture of his and his brother's DNA. That's all.

Yes, obviously. The brother exists enough to produce sperm with his DNA in it. It's besides the point.

You were complaining that the title is clickbait, but throughout the whole article they are talking about father, brother and uncle, including the medical experts.

It's just semantics. What words should they use?

What should the title be according to you?

originally posted by: OHTheHumanity
a reply to: GetHyped
Yes, obviously. The brother exists enough to produce sperm with his DNA in it. It's besides the point.

No, this is the "SPOOKY SPACE GHOST IMPREGNATES MOTHER" fantasy again.

The brother does not exist. The "brother" existed in the womb as some cells. THose cells merged with the person's cells. The person now has a mixture of cells, some with DNA A, some with DNA B.

That's it.

I'm not going to bother going round and round on this issue any further.

a reply to: GetHyped

No, this is the "SPOOKY SPACE GHOST IMPREGNATES MOTHER" fantasy again.

Yes, and again, you are the one refering to it. I said no such thing.

The brother does not exist. The "brother" existed in the womb as some cells. THose cells merged with the person's cells. The person now has a mixture of cells, some with DNA A, some with DNA B. That's it.

They didn't merge with the person's cells, since this person is the result of the merger of these cells. The person that you are refering to existed no more or less than the twin, since he also was just a clump of cells, before merging. The actual person has both DNA sets from two different embryos in the same body.

Like I said the brother exists enough to pass on his genes.

And this is what the expert says.

“So the father is the fusion of two people, both the child’s father and uncle. That’s wicked cool,” said Starr.

The writer of the article didn't get it when he said this though,

Prepare to have your mind blown. This is the fascinating case study of a man who failed a paternity test because part of his genome actually belongs to his unborn twin. This means that the genetic father of the child is actually the man in question’s brother, who never made it past a few cells in the womb.

There is no unborn twin, the man is the result of two twin embryos merging. The "never made past a few cells" thing is a misunderstanding.

At this point, Starr’s team decided to delve a little deeper, with the idea that the man could possibly be a “human chimera,” i.e. an individual with different genomes. It’s actually not uncommon for multiple fertilizations to happen in the womb even when only one child is born. What can sometimes happen is two independent early embryos, at this stage just clumps of cells, actually fuse together and go on to develop normally as a single individual.

There was a case a few years ago where 3 children were removed from their parents for suspected abuse. Through the medical testing etc to establish how they had sustained bruising, it was found they suffered some syndrome or other.

The parents not only knew they had not abused the children, they were aware of how easily they bruised. They put up a good fight to get their kids back and because of this, submitted to testing to see if there was any way to help the children cope with the syndrome. These tests revealed the mother that had conceived, carried and bore the children was in fact, not the biological mother.

Further tests revealed the DNA of the mothers ovaries was not the same as her DNA but matched that of the children. The mothers husband was the natural, biological father but the mother had no ovaries of her own! She was deemed to be chimera with the fully developed ovaries of her unborn sibling being her only route to fertility!

Happily, the kids were returned to the parents and the family were re-established.

I think chimera is evidence of how powerful is the survival instinct, that the dying twin ensured her DNA would be passed on regardless, as in the case of the father in the OP's story. I wonder if there was a 'mix' of genetic information going on there or if all of the father's sperm was actually the unborn brothers? I did not see anything in the article saying the eldest child was tested and found to be the father's natural conceived/born child.

a reply to: dashen

this is unbelievable...

i wonder of the hallachic implications?

furthermore... if this 'few cell' excuse of a man can get laid, then hell... anyone could get laid!

a reply to: combatmaster

Halachicly Unless they were conjoined twins There is no question that the father is the husband of the mother.
But the idea that even a few cells can get laid, That's going to make some people pretty bitter somewhere

a reply to: teapot

I think chimera is evidence of how powerful is the survival instinct, that the dying twin ensured her DNA would be passed on regardless, as in the case of the father in the OP's story. I wonder if there was a 'mix' of genetic information going on there or if all of the father's sperm was actually the unborn brothers? I did not see anything in the article saying the eldest child was tested and found to be the father's natural conceived/born child.

This was actually mentioned in the article, but I didn't catch it reading it the first time either.

To test this theory, DNA samples were taken from both the cheek of the father, which was used for the original paternity tests, and also his sperm. Once again, the cheek cells didn’t match up with the child, but the sperm sample told a different story.

Supporting the human chimera idea, what they found was a “major” genome, accounting for roughly 90% of the sperm cells, and a “minor” genome that only represented about 10%, Starr explained. The major genome matched up with the cheek cells, but the minor genome was consistent with the child’s DNA.

This is pretty mindboggling. I wonder if the twins DNA is only present in part of the sperm, or if it maybe is present in some the man's braincells or cells of other organs.

It doesn't seem like they found any of the twin's DNA in the man's saliva though, but I don't know if that rules out such a thing.


It's pretty funny to see that the sperm containing the twin's DNA, although heavily outnumbered, had the fastest swimmer.