A white couple allegedly faked a DNA test in a bid to keep a mixed-race baby that was born through surrogacy, a court has heard.

The pair, referred to only as Mr and Mrs P in a judgment at the High Court, agreed to pay surrogate Ms T, who they met on Facebook, a sum of £16,000 before attempting to have a baby through home insemination.

The agreement also stated that Ms T would ‘abstain from sexual intercourse’ until a pregnancy was confirmed.

After eight failed attempts, they succeeded in May 2022 and the baby, referred to as J, was born in February 2023.

But after early concerns were raised over J’s paternity by the paternal grandmother, it emerged the couple had used a DNA test which did not have court approval and in January 2024 they filed for an adoption order instead.

In June 2024, the pair then wrote in a statement that ‘although they had not had a second DNA test, they now accepted that Mr P is not J’s biological father’.

The couple said that ‘as J has grown J’s complexion has obviously darkened and it has become apparent that they are of mixed race’, Ms Justice Ruth Henke added in a written judgment in October.

But the judge accepted that ‘lies’ over the DNA test were fuelled by Mr and Mrs P’s love for J, who they still viewed as their child regardless of the identity of the biological father.

She granted them an adoption order, adding it was in the baby’s ‘lifelong best interests’.

Mr and Mrs P met their surrogate on a Facebook group in June 2021 after three years of attempting to conceive a child naturally. 

Ms T entered into an agreement which said she would ‘abstain from sexual intercourse’ until a pregnancy was confirmed.

After eight failed attempts at home insemination using Mr P’s sperm, she told the ‘intended parents’ she was pregnant after a further attempt in May 2022. 

Mr and Mrs P, aged 41 and 38 respectively, were both present at the birth.

J’s father was named as Mr P on the birth certificate but the baby’s grandmother started expressing doubts about J’s paternity when the couple applied for a parental order in May 2023.

The couple noticed the baby’s skin darkening but thought it reflected its father’s olive skin, the judgment said. 

But it emerged they had used a ‘faked DNA test’ in their parental order application.

Later that year, the couple accepted Mr P was not the child’s biological father and applied for an adoption order.

In a July 2024 statement, they added: ‘We were aware that Ms T only dated men of black African or Caribbean ethnicity and became concerned. 

‘We raised this in a telephone conversation with Ms T. She confirmed she had a sexual relationship with a man during the period in which we were trying to conceive.

‘Ms T explained this was around the time of our last home inseminations, in June 2022. Ms T has never told us who this man is.’

The couple admitted the DNA test they submitted used false samples during court proceedings in August this year.

Mr and Mrs P did not take samples of J’s saliva and instead sent swabs from the Mr P and his own mother to DNA testing company NorthGene. 

The child’s grandmother had taken cheek swabs in a ‘spur of the moment’ move amid her concerns J’s complexion was growing darker.

Giving judgment, Ms Henke said: ‘I find that they were terrified of losing a child to whom they were strongly attached and who was strongly attached to them.’

Granting them the adoption order, she added: ‘No other order will provide the stability and permanency J’s welfare requires.’

The judge warned against concluding that ‘the ends justified the means’. 

‘This judgment should be read as a cautionary tale of what can go wrong when strangers who meet through social media to bring a child into this world through surrogacy and when one or more of the parties take risks around the circumstances of conception.’ 

‘Intended parents’ can register as the legal parents of a surrogate child if they possess a genetic link to the baby and can prove the surrogate was paid only ‘reasonable expenses’.