DOS Cable on Genetic Testing Results

R 120128Z MAR 99
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO ALL DIPLOMATIC AND CONSULAR POSTS
SPECIAL EMBASSY PROGRAM
DAR ES SALAAM POUCH
TIRANA POUCH
MONROVIA POUCH
DOHA POUCH
KINSHASA POUCH

Unclas State 045390

Visas Inform Consuls

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: CVIS, KFRD

Subject: Genetic Testing Results And Their Meaning In Visa Processing

Ref: (A) State 18305, (B)97 State 49849, (C) 96 State 126534,
(D)96 State 82704, (E)9 FAM 42.41 PN4, (F)9 FAM 42.42 N1,
(G)9 FAM 42.43 N4.2, (H) Lagos 11834 (Notal)

1. Begin Summary. This cable supplements previous guidance on genetic testing (Refs), providing additional information on when genetic testing is appropriate, what percentage of parentage probability is desirable, and what information labs need in order to provide useful results. End summary

2. Genetic testing is expensive, time consuming and logistically complex, and should never become a routine part of the visa adjudication process. Currently, no test can prove parentage with 100 percent certainty. In fact, different labs testing the same samples can report different results depending on the genetic markers tested. Therefore, to the extent possible, consular officers should make determinations of parentage based on evidence such as Birth Certificates, Baptismal Certificates, etc. Only when such evidence is unavailable or not credible is genetic testing advisable.

3. When genetic testing appears warranted, the Conoff should advise the applicant that genetic testing may/may establish the validity of the relationship; that such testing is entirely voluntary; and that all costs of testing and related expenses must be borne by the petitioner/beneficiary and paid to the laboratory in advance.

4. The approval of a visa petition is prima facie evidence of the relationship between the petitioner and the beneficiary. 9 FAM 42.43 N1 stipulates that only if a consular officer knows or has reason to believe that the beneficiary is not entitled to status shall a consular officer return the petition to the INS approving office. Such a determination must be based upon evidence that the INS did not have available at the time of adjudication. DNA analysis which excludes the tested individual as the parent suffices to meet this burden of proof.

5. Ref A states that American Association of Blood Banks (AABB) standards mandates 99 percent to be the minimum requirement for the probability of paternity, except in rare circumstances. Unfortunately, this statement over-simplifies matters and does not/not mean that all results 99 percent and higher should be accepted as proof of paternity (maternity), or that all results below 99 percent exclude paternity (maternity).

6. The type of test performed, the genetic profile of the local population and factors specific to the case at hand will all affect the level of probability which a post should require. Thus, each post should consult with local physicians and labs, consider local fraud profiles, and establish a post-specific desired level of confidence. Post should place this information in a cover letter which should be forwarded to labs with each request for genetic testing. Any post which proposes to impose a standard higher than 99 percent should provide a justification to VO/F/P before implementing the standard.

7. RFLP mapping is the most powerful type of genetic testing currently available. RFLP mapping can typically exclude an average of 99.9 percent of falsely claimed parents and will generally provide a probability of paternity (maternity) in excess of 99 percent in cases where the alleged parent is not excluded. RFLP mapping requires relatively large blood samples, however, and cannot be used in countries where collecting and shipping blood samples is not possible. In cases where substitution of a close relative is likely, posts should request the lab to test at least 6 genetic markers if RFLP mapping is used.

8. PCR based testing is commonly used to evaluate DNA samples collected by scraping the cells lining the inside of the cheeks with a swab (aka Buccal Swab). PCR based testing is typically 10 to 100 times less powerful than RFLP mapping, but is the only alternative in countries where blood samples cannot be collected or shipped. In cases where substitution of a close relative is likely, posts should request the lab to test at least 15 genetic markers if PCR based testing is used.

9. Lab results can be interpreted differently based on the genetic profile of the local population. In countries where there is a high degree of intermarriage among family members and the population is homogeneous, a probability of
99 percent might not be conclusive (an uncle's blood substituted for that of the father might easily result in a 99 percent probability). In such a population, a post might advise labs that a higher than usual degree of probability is desired (for example, 99.5 percent) and provide the lab with a description of the local genetic profile. The lab may then test a wider range of genetic markers to achieve a
more refined result.

10. In highly heterogeneous populations where little intra-family mixing occurs, on the other hand, a result of 99 percent or even somewhat less might be conclusive. Again, if the lab is aware of the local conditions, it can tailor its testing to meet a post's needs.

11. It is extremely important that test results be evaluated in light of non-genetic evidence gathered by the consular and medical personnel coordinating the testing. Such information may include clues of premeditated misrepresentation of one or more members of a family. Again, this information may affect the lab's assumptions, analysis of the test results and even the number of genetic
markers compared.

12. Posts should feel free to contact the laboratory for clarification if the lab's findings are inconclusive. Labs are able to conduct analysis of additional genetic markers to help resolve such cases. It is also possible for a laboratory to calculate the likelihood the tested individual is an uncle as well as the likelihood that he is a father. Where such concerns exist, officers should ask the lab to calculate which relationship is favored and by how much. A laboratory which states it is unable to comply with this type of a request should not be used for tests when substitutions are a concern, and posts are requested to contact VO/F/P in such instances for further guidance.

Pickering