Wondering about blood results

Caelyn saw the midwife today. She was told that her blood group is 0 Negative, that there are no D Antibodies and that she is not immune to Rubella.

I am convinced someone mucked up. Everyone in my family and in her father's family is Positive, so HOW could she have a Negative grouping?

After the car accident she had transfusions of cross-matched 0 Pos blood. If that was the wrong type, she would have D Antibodies, but she does not have those.

We know her immunity system is working properly - she is very immune to TB, for instance. Yet the blood tests show that she is not immune to Rubella, in spite of having an MMR as a baby, and a single Rubella immunisation at school when she was 11 years old.

I am certain that these results are wrong. I quietly insisted that the tests be repeated, and the midwife didn't like it. She told Caelyn that she would see her at home next week. It seems awkward mothers aren't welcome. I wouldn't have said anything if it was an unimportant issue, but blood types and antibody levels ARE important in high risk pregnancies like this one.

Anywhere else in the world, and this would not be a problem. The problem in England is that the stupidest reasons are given in support of "child abuse" theories. One woman who was sent to prison for murdering her child had to listen to "evidence" from the Health Visitor that she was suspicious of Mrs P because when she had said that she would visit the following Thursday, Mrs P had wanted to know what time to expect her. To me, that is a perfectly normal and reasonable question, and definitely not any sort of "evidence" of suspicious behaviour. (Mrs P was later freed from prison and declared innocent of her baby's cot death. To have lost a child and then suffering in prison is awful and unspeakable)
The point is the ridiculous flimsy nonsense they use as "evidence".
I hope I haven't caused "them" to look at my daughter and her husband with suspicion.