Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Sofia Vergara Is being sued by her own embryos

86 replies

Soubriquet · 14/12/2016 17:26

link

I can't even summon the words to describe how bonkers this is

OP posts:
Wolverbamptonwanderer · 15/12/2016 03:40

Yes I can see that Paul but despite that Louisiana doesn't appear to have any laws giving frozen embryos the right to be implanted. Its different to abortion laws. I honestly don't think there is any case to be heard.

Wolverbamptonwanderer · 15/12/2016 03:44

Meant to say- especially seeing as there is a presumably tight contract clearly stating who they belong to

Italiangreyhound · 15/12/2016 07:58

The Natalie Evans case was very sad. I actually feel that people should not have the right to withdraw consent to their embryos being used. Which would mean that in the case on this thread one of the couple should have the right to use the embryos. But in that case the woman could change her legal arrangements so there is no financial benefit to the man by using the embryos.

I guess the moral of the story is be careful who you fertilize eggs with!

LoveAMoan · 15/12/2016 08:56

Natallie Evans should have been offered the chance to have some of her eggs fertilised by a donor (or maybe she was offered and said no, I don't know). Then she would have been able to have full control of the embryos with or without her (by then) ex's consent.

There isn't any legal personhood for embryos in the UK (rightly of course because the concept is so ludicrous and damaging to women) so her case tried a different tack, to test the limits of joint consent when it is given at the outset of a lengthy procedure. The argument failed, rightly IMO.

It must have been awful for Natallie Evans but it wasn't that she couldn't ever have a baby, but that she couldn't have the chance of a baby using her own eggs and her ex's sperm. She could still have carried another embryo donor egg and someone else's sperm or had a child another way.

She may have ended up in that position anyway if implantation had failed but it was clearly devastating for her not to be able to even try. I felt very sorry for her too even though her case shouldn't have got off the ground really as the judgement against her argument seemed inevitable.

One of the results of her case is couples going through IVF are now encouraged to talk about what would happen if they broke up part way through treatment.

The Vergara case seems to be all about an angry ex husband trying to take advantage of pro life legislation to get hold of his ex wife's money via her trust fund she had set up to look after her kids. That's a horrible reason to try to bring children into the world and seems to be about punishment and control.

I've seen no report that the ex husband is azoospermic and so could have no other genetically related child without using those embryos. It's not like the Evans case where the motivation was very different.

MiniCooperLover · 15/12/2016 09:23

In the Vergara case they weren't even married, just engaged. They had embryos frozen because she had thyroid cancer in the past and it was recommended they use a surrogate, then they split up. I think he's bitter she dumped him, I'd read stories he was using her for her connections. So imagine you get dumped, then your stunning ex takes up with and marries Joe Manganiello! I think he's doing this out of spite. And even if someone else has 'taken custody', it's v unlikely Lowb didn't give his permission surely?

Imagine if the story on my picture is true, I wonder what that'll do to it all. Good luck to her, I pray she wins this.

Sofia Vergara Is being sued by her own embryos
gabsdot · 15/12/2016 10:44

This is interesting but I did IVF and anyone who has done IVF will tell you that although it's great to hear that your eggs have fertilised it's meaningless until they actually implant and you get that positive pregnancy test.
So I would argue that frozen embryos are no more alive than a single sperm or a single egg.

InCaseWeNeverMeetAgain · 15/12/2016 10:52

That is crazy Shock.

CaveMum · 15/12/2016 10:57

I read something this morning that says that Loeb is not actually involved in this case - he dropped HIS case against her last week. This is a new case that has been brought by a couple of right-wing pro-life nut cases.

I'll find a link that goes into more detail.

CaveMum · 15/12/2016 11:01

Link to article: www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/12/08/crazy-vergara-embryo-case-could-open-floodgates.html

Quote from the article:
"It is unclear whether this new suit actually involves Loeb, but it’s safe to assume he’d be sympathetic to the cause. The 46-page petition does not include the 41-year-old businessman as a party and never explains who actually started the trust, yet it includes several private texts between the former couple documenting the IVF process (“You can’t keep 4 frozen lives forever or kill them, we will go to hell,” Loeb allegedly sent in one) as well as the fallout from their breakup (“We still have those 2 frozen babys,” he wrote in another)."

The two nutters lawyers that brought the case are described here:

"The masterminds behind the operation are a pair of lawyers, James Arruebarrena and Catherine Glenn Foster. Arruebarrena, who did not return a request for comment, is an employment and personal injury attorney who doesn’t seem to have experience in family law. According to his website, he is known as “The Equalizer” for his ability to “level the playing field.”
Foster’s interest in the case is more transparent. Currently admitted to practice law in Virginia, Foster, 35, has dedicated her career thus far to working for firms with a pro-life agenda and appears often in the press to comment on the issue. In August, she colorfully responded to a hidden camera video showing a plumber contracted by Planned Parenthood telling protesters he was “here for the work” and would install toilets for the KKK if they wanted them: “Given Planned Parenthood’s 100-year history of racism and misogyny, we should not be surprised that a supporter of an organization that would flush human rights down the toilet would be in league with the organization that will be washing babies’ blood down the sink,” Foster said on the anti-abortion website, Life Site News."

They sound a delightful pair Hmm

LoveAMoan · 15/12/2016 11:21

Thanks Mini I hadn't realised he is an ex fiancé. That all sounds so grim.

If the ex is so 'pro life' he should have avoided taking part in IVF entirely. hopefully if it gets to court they will bear this in mind. But maybe this is why the third, activist party is involved?

LoveAMoan · 15/12/2016 11:22

X post with Cave

New posts on this thread. Refresh page