A Florida Couple Welcomed a Baby Girl After IVF, Then a DNA Test Revealed a Shocking Mix-Up That Changed Two Families’ Lives

Tiffany Score and Steven Mills expected the birth of their daughter to mark the beginning of a new chapter in their lives, but the arrival of their baby girl in December 2025 raised questions that neither parent could have anticipated. The couple, who are both white, welcomed a child whose appearance differed significantly from their own, prompting concerns about whether the fertility treatment had gone as planned. According to the original CafeMom report, the couple eventually discovered that their daughter was not genetically related to either of them.

The discovery transformed what should have been a straightforward beginning to parenthood into a complicated situation involving genetic testing, legal proceedings, and the search for another family. Score and Mills had entrusted a fertility clinic with the embryos they hoped would help them start a family, believing that the procedure had followed their instructions. Instead, they found themselves trying to understand how a baby could be born to them through treatment without sharing their genetic connection.

Years of Planning Led the Couple to Fertility Treatment

Score and Mills had turned to assisted reproduction after deciding to pursue parenthood through in vitro fertilization, commonly known as IVF. The process involved creating embryos using Score’s eggs and Mills’ sperm, then arranging for the embryos to be frozen for future use. According to reporting by PEOPLE, the couple had successfully created three viable embryos that were supposed to remain under the clinic’s care.

The family’s treatment involved IVF Life Inc., which operated as the Fertility Center of Orlando in Longwood, Florida. The clinic was responsible for handling the embryos and carrying out the procedure intended to help Score become pregnant. The couple’s later lawsuit would focus on what happened to those embryos and whether the clinic implanted one that belonged to another patient.

The Couple Believed Their Embryos Were Safely Stored

The couple’s complaint stated that their three embryos had been placed in cryogenic storage after being created through the fertility process. Such arrangements allow embryos to be preserved for later reproductive treatment, making accurate identification and handling essential to the patients’ plans. Score and Mills believed the embryos remained available for their future family-building efforts.

Their lawsuit alleged that the clinic subsequently carried out a transfer using an embryo that was not one of the three created from their genetic material. The complaint identified March 2025 as the month when Score underwent the embryo transfer that resulted in her pregnancy. These allegations became central to the couple’s effort to determine whether the error involved only their treatment or pointed to a wider problem.

A Successful Pregnancy Appeared to Confirm the Treatment Had Worked

After the transfer, Score became pregnant and continued through her pregnancy without initially knowing that anything might be wrong with the embryo’s identity. The pregnancy progressed to a full-term birth, and the couple prepared to welcome their first daughter. From their perspective, the treatment had achieved the outcome they had hoped for.

On December 11, 2025, Score gave birth to a healthy baby girl whom the couple named Shea Score Mills. But the birth raised an unexpected question because the baby did not resemble either parent in the way they had anticipated. The difference in appearance prompted the couple to investigate whether the embryo transfer had been carried out correctly.

The Newborn’s Appearance Raised Questions About Her Genetic Origins

Score and Mills’ initial concern was not simply about how their daughter looked, but about what her appearance might indicate regarding the fertility procedure. Both parents were white, while Shea appeared to have a different racial background. That discrepancy led them to question whether the embryo transferred during treatment was actually theirs.

The couple’s lawsuit described the circumstances surrounding the discovery, but appearance alone was not the final proof of a genetic mismatch. They pursued genetic testing to establish whether Shea was biologically related to them. The results, as described in the legal complaint and subsequent reporting, confirmed that neither Score nor Mills was genetically related to the child.

DNA Testing Confirmed the Couple’s Worst Suspicions

The genetic results established that the baby Score had carried and delivered was not genetically connected to either intended parent. This meant the issue was not merely an unexpected physical resemblance but a question of embryo identity and reproductive treatment. The finding raised immediate questions about whose embryo had been transferred and what had happened to the couple’s own genetic material.

In its reporting on the lawsuit, PEOPLE documented the couple’s account of the genetic findings, including their concern that another family might have received one of their embryos. The possibility meant that more than one family could be affected by the same underlying error. At that stage, the couple faced uncertainty not only about Shea’s biological parents but also about the fate of their remaining embryos.

Their Love for Shea Was Separate From the Search for Answers

Despite the genetic discovery, Score and Mills made clear that their attachment to Shea was not dependent on biological relatedness. They described their daughter as deeply loved and emphasized that her well-being remained their priority. Their public statements reflected the difficult distinction between welcoming a child as their own and understanding that another family might be genetically connected to her.

The couple also faced uncertainty about what could happen if Shea’s biological parents were identified and sought to establish their own parental relationship. Their attorney, Jack Scarola, explained that this concern was one reason the family pursued legal action. The case therefore involved more than identifying a laboratory error, because the outcome could affect the future of the child the couple had already welcomed into their home.

The Lawsuit Sought Answers Beyond One Family’s Experience

Score and Mills filed their lawsuit against IVF Life Inc. and Dr. Milton McNichol in January 2026. The complaint alleged that the clinic had transferred an embryo that did not belong to them and sought information about how the mistake happened. It also raised concerns about whether their own embryos could have been transferred to other patients.

The couple wanted the clinic to disclose relevant information to patients who might have been affected by similar discrepancies. They also sought genetic testing for children born following embryo implantation at the clinic during the five-year period covered by their request. Their legal action was designed to help establish the extent of the problem, although the requested measures were not themselves proof that other families had experienced the same error.

Other Families Could Have Been Affected by the Embryo Mix-Up

The possibility that another family had received one of Score and Mills’ embryos created a second major concern. If an embryo had been transferred to an unintended patient, the resulting child could be genetically connected to the couple even if another person had carried and delivered the baby. The same circumstances could explain why Shea’s biological parents might have been unaware of what had happened.

In January 2026, the couple publicly expressed hope that they could identify Shea’s genetic parents and determine what had happened to their own genetic child, if another family had received one of their embryos. Their attorney also reported receiving inquiries from people who wondered whether they could be biologically connected to Shea or whether their own IVF-conceived children were genetically related to them. These inquiries underscored the importance of testing, but they did not establish that every family contacting the attorney had been affected.

The Clinic Acknowledged an Error Was Under Investigation

In a statement reported in January, IVF Life Inc. said it was cooperating with an investigation to determine the source of an error that resulted in a child being born without a genetic relationship to the intended parents. The clinic also said multiple entities were involved in the process of identifying when and where the error might have occurred. Its stated priority was to support the investigation and protect the well-being of the patient and child.

The couple, meanwhile, continued pursuing answers through the courts because they needed information about their embryos and the treatment records. Their complaint raised questions about laboratory procedures, embryo tracking, and whether the clinic had information that could help identify other affected patients. The precise sequence of events that caused the mismatch remained a matter for investigation and litigation rather than something that could be established from the birth alone.

The Search for Shea’s Biological Parents Eventually Succeeded

In April 2026, the couple’s attorney confirmed that Shea’s biological parents had been identified. The development addressed one of the central uncertainties that had followed the birth, although the families’ identities were not made public. The discovery also created an opportunity for the adults involved to consider how they could protect Shea while navigating their different connections to her.

According to ABC News’ report on the agreement reached by the families, Score and Mills said they appreciated the role public reporting had played in helping identify Shea’s genetic parents. They also emphasized their intention to respect the other family’s privacy. The identification of the biological parents brought a major development in the case, but questions about the clinic’s handling of the embryos remained.

Both Families Reached a Custody Agreement

By June 2026, Score and Mills had reached an agreement with Shea’s biological parents concerning the child’s future. The agreement allowed Score and Mills to retain permanent legal custody of the little girl, while the biological parents’ identities remained confidential. The arrangement offered a way to address the competing concerns without publicly exposing the other family.

ClickOrlando reported on the custody agreement and related court filings, confirming that the two sets of parents had reached a mutually devised arrangement. Score and Mills also expressed their intention to build a relationship with Shea’s biological parents based on friendship and trust. The agreement resolved the immediate question of who would raise Shea, but it did not settle every issue surrounding the fertility treatment.

The Couple Continued Investigating What Happened to Their Embryos

Even after Shea’s biological parents were identified, Score and Mills still needed answers about their own genetic material. Their complaint had raised concerns about the three embryos originally created for them, including whether another patient might have received one. The couple’s legal representatives later said additional information about embryo histories and laboratory-clinic errors had emerged.

Court filings reported in June indicated that the couple had moved an embryo to another fertility provider, where it could undergo genetic testing before they decided what to do next. Their attorneys also said discrepancies in earlier records might require further court involvement to clarify the embryo’s history. The additional testing mattered because the custody agreement addressed Shea’s future, not necessarily the full history of the couple’s reproductive treatment.

The Fertility Center of Orlando Subsequently Closed

The clinic’s future became another significant development as the legal proceedings continued. In April 2026, PEOPLE reported that the Fertility Center of Orlando had announced it would close its operations, advising patients to arrange the transfer of stored reproductive material to another licensed provider. The announcement followed the lawsuit filed by Score and Mills and separate litigation involving another patient.

The closure did not, by itself, establish the legal responsibility of every person or organization involved in the alleged embryo mix-up. Score and Mills’ attorneys continued investigating the extent of the reported laboratory and clinic errors and whether additional parties might bear responsibility. The clinic’s shutdown also made the safe transfer and identification of stored embryos an important practical concern for patients whose treatment materials remained in its care.

The Custody Agreement Did Not End the Search for Accountability

The agreement gave Score and Mills legal custody of Shea, but their broader questions about the fertility procedure remained unresolved in the latest reporting reviewed for this article. They had sought records that could explain how the embryo mismatch occurred and whether other patients might have been affected. Their attorneys indicated that additional information could lead to changes in the lawsuit or further claims against other parties.

The distinction matters because a custody arrangement and a legal determination of fault serve different purposes. The former establishes the immediate family arrangement for the child, while the latter concerns what happened during the fertility treatment and who, if anyone, should be held legally responsible. As of the latest developments reviewed here, the full chain of events behind the embryo error had not been conclusively established in a final court ruling.

Shea’s Story Highlights the Importance of Accurate Embryo Identification

The case illustrates how an error during fertility treatment can affect several people at once, including the person who carries a pregnancy, the intended parents, the child, and the child’s genetic family. For Score and Mills, the discovery began with an unexpected discrepancy at birth and expanded into questions about genetic parentage, custody, and the safety of their stored embryos. Their experience also raised questions about what information patients should be able to obtain when a clinic discovers a reproductive error.

For now, the custody agreement means Shea will continue to be raised by Score and Mills, while the family intends to maintain a respectful relationship with her biological parents. The couple’s investigation into their embryo history has remained a separate concern, and the clinic’s closure has added another layer to the process of finding answers. What began as the arrival of a long-awaited daughter has become a legal and medical dispute involving two families, a child’s future, and unanswered questions about the treatment that brought them together.