NEED TO KNOW
-
A woman who became pregnant after having sex with identical twins was told by a court in London that it’s “not possible” to identify the father of the baby
-
The mother of the baby had sex with the two men within four days of one another
-
“Whilst DNA testing establishes that the child’s biological father is one of these twins, it is not possible to say which of them it is,” a judge said
A woman who became pregnant after having sex with identical twins within four days of one another has been told it isn’t possible to identify the father of her child, it was revealed in court.
The baby’s mother and one of the identical twins asked London’s Court of Appeal to overturn a previous family court decision, after the other twin was registered as the father on the child’s birth certificate, per The Guardian.
The mom and the twin not listed as the father went to court, seeking to take over parental responsibility for the baby, known as child P, Sky News and The Times noted.
However, judges have now ruled that it is “not possible” to work out exactly who the father is, according to a court judgment handed down earlier this month.
A photo of the Court of Appeal in London, U.K.
Credit: Getty
“Whilst DNA testing establishes that the child’s biological father is one of these twins, it is not possible to say which of them it is,” the documents — examined by PEOPLE and posted online by the United Kingdom’s Courts and Tribunals Judiciary — stated.
Per the court documents, hearing dates previously took place in November 2025, and the judgment was handed down remotely on March 20.
Judge Sir Andrew McFarlane said in the ruling that “it was not possible to establish the paternity of P, other than to say that the father is one or other of the two identical twin brothers.”
It was also mentioned that each of the twins “had a 50% chance of being the father.”
A stock photo of a mother and a baby
Credit: Getty
McFarlane added elsewhere, “Currently the truth of P’s paternity is that their father is one or other of these two identical twins, but it is not possible to say which.”
“It is possible, indeed likely, that by the time P reaches maturity it may be possible for science to identify one father and exclude the other twin, but, for the coming time that cannot be done without very significant cost, and so her ‘truth’ is binary and not a single man,” the judge added.
Judge Madeleine Reardon said, per the documents, that at a fact finding hearing last year, she “found that both brothers had had sex with [the baby’s mother] within 4 days of each other in the month when P was conceived. … It is equally likely that each of the brothers is P’s father.”
A stock photo of a pregnant woman
Credit: Getty
Never miss a story — sign up for PEOPLE’s free daily newsletter to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories.
McFarlane shared, per the documents, “The situation resulting from the judge’s order and this court’s determination on the principal issue is that if [the twin listed as the father] is the legal father he has parental responsibility, but if he is not he does not, yet it cannot be said whether he is or is not the legal father.”
“That outcome is not in P’s best interests and is contrary to her overall welfare,” the judgment stated.
The judge said, “With the benefit of the hindsight now achieved as to the definition of father, in my view it was wrong for the court not to achieve clarity by discharging any parental responsibility that [the twin listed as the father] may have had…”
He added, “The basis for discharging parental responsibility is, firstly, that, as he is not proved to be the father, [the one twin] should not have been registered as ‘father’ and he is not a candidate for the acquisition of parental responsibility.”
“Secondly, it is plainly not in P’s welfare interests for this ambiguity as to parental responsibility to continue,” McFarlane said in the judgment.
The judge confirmed that “any parental responsibility” that the twin listed as the father may have acquired “shall cease” for the moment.
McFarlane pointed out elsewhere, per the documents, “The failure to prove a fact means that that fact is not proved, it does not mean that the contrary is proved. There is a distinction between something being not proven, and making a positive declaration that the fact asserted is not true.”
The case continues, per Sky News. None of the involved parties were identified by name in the court documents.
Read the original article on People
