Certification in Whiplash Diagnosis &Treatment
Dr Michael Givens DC,CME
Dr. Michael Givens DC,CME 2917 Independence Ste 400 Cape Girardeau, MO 63703   573-651-8686
Call Now 573-651-8686
The Standards for Relationship Testing and Misconceptions Some laboratories report testing a broad range of cases, including relationship tests for routine paternity testing, immigration, prenatal evaluations, and post-mortem evaluations. Exclusion Rate Misconception The exclusion rate misused by several organizations trying to claim that 30% of men are misled into believing they are biological fathers of children when the mother knows this not to be true. This view is incorrect. The exclusion rate includes a number of factors. One is a woman may allege several men as possible fathers because she was sexually active with these individuals. These are not men who were misled into believing they were fathers and then later discover they are not. The testing merely sorts out which man is the biological father and excludes the others. Another factor is that the unexcluded alleged father, as part of his defense, will allege the mother had multiple sexual partners during the time of conception. These men are subsequently tested. Sometimes testing of a man is required because of a legal presumption. This is when the mother properly names the correct biological father but because the child is the product of a marriage (she is (was) married to someone other than the biological father) there is a legal presumption the husband is the father. The husband is tested to rebut the legal presumption even though no one believes he is the biological father of the child. There is no evidence that a large number of the men excluded in the testing were misled into believing they are the biological father of a given child. TESTING WITHOUT THE MOTHER There is still a strong concern about submitting disputed paternity cases without the mother. Testing without the mother presents a number of problems. First, the paternity index is, on average, cut in half. On average it appears that with mother not tested cases the combined paternity index is about one tenth that seen when the mother is tested. This also greatly reduces the ability to detect a falsely accused man, and in some cases, such as incest can easily produce false inclusions. When an apparent inconsistency (mutation) is present, it may not be possible to render an opinion of paternity without obtaining a sample from the mother. The mother is also an important QC step. If the mother is excluded it may indicate a problem in the testing. The testing of the mother may also allow for the detection of fraud, such as welfare fraud on the part of the mother or cases where the alleged father brings a child he knows is his, but in not the child of the mother. Thus, the testing of the mother, even if maternity is not disputed, is important in evaluating the questioned relationship, it improves the chance of obtaining clear results and is a quality control check for both the scientific and legal community. Testing without the mother should only be done HOW MANY INCONSISTENCIES ARE NEEDED TO EXCLUDE A RELATIONSHIP? The AABB standards indicate that laboratories may not exclude with one inconsistency without supporting evidence. Many laboratories have interpreted this to mean there is hard rule that if two inconsistencies are observed, the relationship is excluded. This is not correct. The guidance document cautions laboratories that double or even triple mutation can occur. The laboratory should be cautious in issuing a report as exclusionary with only two inconsistencies. There are also exceptions where one inconsistency may be sufficient. An example would be a reconstruction case where a single inconsistency is observed along with low residual likelihood ratio (low is generally considered < 1.0). The low residual likelihood ratio would be supporting evidence of no relationship. If a laboratory is uncertain about the status of a case, issuing an inconclusive report is an acceptable option. The reason the case is inconclusive should be stated in the report. Source:  Report Summary For Testing In 2010 Prepared By The Relationship Testing Program Unit
Paternity DNA Testing
Medical Legal Consulting Certified Medical Examiner Certified Insurance Consultant
Dr Michael Givens DC, CME
Dr. Michael Givens 2917 Independence Ste 400 Cape Girardeau, MO 63703  573-651-8686
573-651-8686 573-651-8686
The Standards for Relationship Testing and Misconceptions Some laboratories report testing a broad range of cases, including relationship tests for routine paternity testing, immigration, prenatal evaluations, and post-mortem evaluations. Exclusion Rate Misconception The exclusion rate misused by several organizations trying to claim that 30% of men are misled into believing they are biological fathers of children when the mother knows this not to be true. This view is incorrect. The exclusion rate includes a number of factors. One is a woman may allege several men as possible fathers because she was sexually active with these individuals. These are not men who were misled into believing they were fathers and then later discover they are not. The testing merely sorts out which man is the biological father and excludes the others. Another factor is that the unexcluded alleged father, as part of his defense, will allege the mother had multiple sexual partners during the time of conception. These men are subsequently tested. Sometimes testing of a man is required because of a legal presumption. This is when the mother properly names the correct biological father but because the child is the product of a marriage (she is (was) married to someone other than the biological father) there is a legal presumption the husband is the father. The husband is tested to rebut the legal presumption even though no one believes he is the biological father of the child. There is no evidence that a large number of the men excluded in the testing were misled into believing they are the biological father of a given child. TESTING WITHOUT THE MOTHER There is still a strong concern about submitting disputed paternity cases without the mother. Testing without the mother presents a number of problems. First, the paternity index is, on average, cut in half. On average it appears that with mother not tested cases the combined paternity index is about one tenth that seen when the mother is tested. This also greatly reduces the ability to detect a falsely accused man, and in some cases, such as incest can easily produce false inclusions. When an apparent inconsistency (mutation) is present, it may not be possible to render an opinion of paternity without obtaining a sample from the mother. The mother is also an important QC step. If the mother is excluded it may indicate a problem in the testing. The testing of the mother may also allow for the detection of fraud, such as welfare fraud on the part of the mother or cases where the alleged father brings a child he knows is his, but in not the child of the mother. Thus, the testing of the mother, even if maternity is not disputed, is important in evaluating the questioned relationship, it improves the chance of obtaining clear results and is a quality control check for both the scientific and legal community. Testing without the mother should only be done HOW MANY INCONSISTENCIES ARE NEEDED TO EXCLUDE A RELATIONSHIP? The AABB standards indicate that laboratories may not exclude with one inconsistency without supporting evidence. Many laboratories have interpreted this to mean there is hard rule that if two inconsistencies are observed, the relationship is excluded. This is not correct. The guidance document cautions laboratories that double or even triple mutation can occur. The laboratory should be cautious in issuing a report as exclusionary with only two inconsistencies. There are also exceptions where one inconsistency may be sufficient. An example would be a reconstruction case where a single inconsistency is observed along with low residual likelihood ratio (low is generally considered < 1.0). The low residual likelihood ratio would be supporting evidence of no relationship. If a laboratory is uncertain about the status of a case, issuing an inconclusive report is an acceptable option. The reason the case is inconclusive should be stated in the report. Source:  Report Summary For Testing In 2010 Prepared By The Relationship Testing Program Unit