A university
lecturer is suing his ex-wife for £83,500 after she allegedly swapped his sperm
for an ex-lover’s while undergoing fertility treatment.
The respected
academic claims he was led to believe that he was the father of a child born
through in vitro fertilisation (IVF). He subsequently paid thousands of pounds
in child maintenance after he and his wife divorced. A DNA test eventually
revealed the child was not his.
In the first case
of paternity fraud involving IVF in the UK, the lecturer claims that when his
former wife travelled to a fertility clinic in Spain with her ex-lover – a
visit his ex-wife admits took place – the ex-lover pretended he was her husband
and donated sperm .
The couple married
in 2002, and the husband – who already had two children by a previous marriage
– had his vasectomy reversed so they could have a baby. But the wife failed to
conceive and turned to the ex-lover for comfort.
A family source
said: ‘The marriage was turbulent. His wife got bored with her husband and had
long conversations with her ex-lover.’
In 2004 the husband
and wife visited the IVF clinic where the lecturer provided sperm for use
later. But the following year, his wife returned with her ex-lover and he
donated sperm.
During a third visit,
she had a fertilised egg implanted with the clinic using her ex-lover’s
sperm.
Seven months after
the baby’s birth, the husband and wife separated and were divorced in 2007,
with the lecturer sharing custody of his son, now aged nine.
As the child grew
older, the academic noticed he looked like his wife’s ex-lover. A DNA test
carried out when the boy was five confirmed he was not the lecturer’s son.
His wife, now aged
53, said there must have been a mix-up with his sperm at the fertility clinic,
but denied intentionally deceiving her ex-husband. But by then the lecturer had
already paid thousands of pounds in maintenance.
Now the
60-year-old academic has launched a High Court action in a bid to get the money
back. His claim for £83,500 damages in the Queen’s Bench Division is for
fraudulent misrepresentation and the return of maintenance payments, plus
interest.
Professor Allan
Pacey, a fertility expert at the University of Sheffield, said: ‘It’s extremely
unlikely the clinic mixed up the sperm. It’s a bizarre case.’
No comments:
Post a Comment