header-logo header-logo

16 March 2007 / Paul West
Issue: 7264 / Categories: Features , Child law , Family
printer mail-detail

Cracking the code

Revisions to the UK’s paternity testing system are long overdue, says Paul West

While a core of UK paternity testing companies have been delivering their services in compliance with the voluntary Code of Practice and Guidance on Genetic Paternity Testing Services (the code), not all have been so diligent.

Concern over ‘non-consensual’ DNA testing was the issue that originally fuelled ministerial concern and led to the code being published in March 2001. A central tenant of the code was that samples should only be tested when ‘authorised’ consent had been provided.

The code’s voluntary status has meant that in the years following its introduction there was a growth of companies in the UK offering paternity testing without independently confirmed identification and consent, and therefore not adhering to the code’s requirements. Several such companies were short-lived, one leading to bankruptcy in a blaze of publicity, another a highly publicised case of fraudulent testing which led to a conviction and custodial sentence for the proprietor.

Human Tissue Act 2004

It had been hoped that the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll