Ukraine clinic under investigation for using someone else’s DNA

Ukraine clinic under investigation for using someone else’s DNA

The Ukrainian Justice Minister announced two days ago that one of the largest IVF clinics, BiotexCom center for human reproduction, was being investigated following an Italian couple finding out that their child did not have any of their DNA.

Under Ukrainian law, couples undergoing surrogacy are required to have a genetic link with the child, so that at least one of them is the genetic parent. The announcement is that an Italian couple who underwent surrogacy through Biotex in 2011 have discovered  following a DNA test undertaken in Italy that there is no genetic link between them and their child.

The Minister of Justice announced that other cases were being investigated. He called upon surrogates to help provide information to the Ministry in its investigations.

The Minister said that the Ukraine considered that what had happened amounted to “child trafficking” and that the Ukrainian government would sue the relevant clinic. He also said that new laws would be enacted to crack down on practices to prevent any further recurrences.

If this has been occuring, whose eggs were used? Given eggs donors are anonymous in the Ukraine, if record keeping is lax, then it may have been another woman’s egg, even that of the surrogate.

Biotex has been a large and popular clinic for those seeking to undertake surrogacy in the Ukraine.

One might be forgiven for thinking that this is a long way from Australia, but the fact is that Australians have undertaken surrogacy in the Ukraine. According to Biotex’s map it has representative offices throughout Europe, Asia, North America- and in Sydney and Melbourne.

Those undertaking surrogacy in locations that are developing countries or post-Soviet countries must take extreme care. It should never be assumed that IVF clinics and agencies are backed by some government guarantee or rigid regulation. They might be rigidly regulated- but it is very much a case of buyer beware.

I remember all too well the gay couple who went to a Thai clinic for surrogacy- man A and man B. Sperm was provided by each of the men. Man A’s sperm was deemed better than Man’s B. The couple were told that Man A’s sperm was used to conceive the child. All went well. A child was born. Man A was named on the birth certificate as the father. A DNA test was undertaken. Man A was excluded as the father. It appears that Man B’s sperm was used. Luckily this did not prevent the child obtaining Australian citizenship.

Or the gay couple who went to India in its heyday. Sperm was only provided by one of the men for legal reasons. The child was conceived and born. A DNA test determined that the man’s sperm was not used. Who knows who the father was. Luckily, Australian authorities were sympathetic and allowed the child to obtain Australian citizenship.

Request an Appointment
Fill in the form below to find out if you have a claim.
Request an Appointment - Stephen Page
Things to Read, Watch & Listen

Sperm donor family limit in Queensland explained

Queensland’s new sperm donor family limit was intended to create clarity, consistency and better access to donor sperm. Instead, guidance issued to IVF clinics has produced a result that appears to halve donor access for many lesbian couples. The legislation provides for a 10-family limit. Yet where two women are in a couple and seek… Read More »Sperm donor family limit in Queensland explained

NSW fertility inquiry: surrogacy evidence under scrutiny

The New South Wales Legislative Council fertility inquiry is examining difficult and practical questions about access to assisted reproductive treatment. Distance matters. Cost matters. Regulation matters. For many people trying to create a family, these are not abstract policy concerns. They can determine whether treatment is available at all. Among the issues before the inquiry… Read More »NSW fertility inquiry: surrogacy evidence under scrutiny

Surrogacy lawyer explains upcoming ALRC reports

Australia is approaching an important moment for family and fertility law. By the end of July 2026 and during August 2026, the Australian Law Reform Commission, or ALRC, is expected to deliver two major reports to Commonwealth Attorney General Michelle Rowland. One report will address surrogacy law. The other will examine Australia’s human tissue laws.… Read More »Surrogacy lawyer explains upcoming ALRC reports

Family Law Section Law Council of Australia Award
Member of Queensland law society
Family law Practitioners Association
International Academy of Family Lawyers - IAFL
Mediator Standards Board