to ask opinions on this IVF court case?

[iogo]

I've had a quick look but can't see another thread, apologies if there is one.

I've just read this story on the BBC about a man losing his court case for damages against an IVF clinic where his ex wife forged his signature to undergo a second round of IVF after they'd split, resulting in a daughter.

I feel so desperately sorry for that child and the man involved. I can't quite wrap my head around what his ex wife did. I can understand the court not forcing the clinic to pay damages such as school fees, future wedding etc. I can understand the father not wanting to pay for the upkeep of the child and I'm not sure it's fair to make him. But then how unfair would it be to pay maintenance and school fees for one child but not the full sibling (I mention school fees as it's mentioned in the article so I'm presuming the older sibling goes to private school and the ex wife was in a position to be able to afford priveate IVF as the NHS is not mentioned)

BBC link www.bbc.com/news/health-41525215

Yes, it is half hers and half his. It is not at all some random surrogates though, which is why it is not and never could be the same thing.

The surrogate is irrelevant as she would not be the one stealing the embryo.

Obviously. Are you being deberately obtuse?

Of course it's the same thing, anyone who says it isn't is being deliberately obtuse. if a man forged a woman's signature in order to obtain the embrio so he could have a child it is exactly the same

IT IS NOT.

How stupid do you have to be to understand the difference between "woman fakes signature to get her OWN EMBRYO implanted into HERSELF" and "man fakes signature to get embryo implanted into TOTAL STRANGER who would then be the legal mother"

No matter what the rights or wrongs of the issue, can we use some basic common sense please?

to NOT understand. fuckign phone.

Obviously. Are you being deberately obtuse

Sigh. You don't understand the basics. You can't even tell the difference between 2people and three.

And yes legally she would be the one stealing the embryo, she literally would be taking possesion of it.

her OWN EMBRYO

Half hers.

existential If the woman in this case had fraudulently arranged for the embryo to be implanted in a surrogate, would that change the outcome of this case, vis, would the father still be liable for maintenence?

Just another case where no matter what, on MN, the man is wrong.

If the woman in this case had fraudulently arranged for the embryo to be implanted in a surrogate, would that change the outcome of this case, vis, would the father still be liable for maintenence

That is a difficult question, I don't know.

Just another case where no matter what, on MN, the man is wrong

Not at all. The woman is wrong here. The man is liable.

With cases like this there has to be some degree of hypothesis when discussing how things would have panned out had the situation been reversed. Some people are too dim to grasp that though.

Basically, it seems to be that the this person has a penis rather than a womb and therefore needs to suck it up.

Half hers

Yes, I said that. But NOT at all the strangers. Do you grasp that part?

Basically, it seems to be that the this person has a penis rather than a womb and therefore needs to suck it up

No, it seems to be that biology has certain realities that cannot be changed.

Well you can't have it both ways can you? If the man would be liable if he fraudulently obtained the embrio to have implanted in a surrogate then the woman would be equally liable if she did the same.

It seems that you are the one needing biology lessons since you don't seem to grasp the concept that half an embrio doesn't equal the right to have the child.

Oh ffs.
It seems that you are the one needing biology lessons since you don't seem to grasp the concept that half an embrio doesn't equal the right to have the child

I never said it did. I said, repeatedly, that the mother was wrong.

But ffs, men and women are not equal and interchangeable in reproductive biology, and all this "it's the same thing" is INANE. Try thinking for a whole 5 seconds and you might realise thsi.

"The man is liable."

If is as simple as that then I think we will see more men be much clearer about IVF treatments and destruction afterwards. The man was liable when he agreed that is genetic material was taken out of a petri dish and inserted into the woman. I dont get why he was liable when he didnt agree.

But ffs, men and women are not equal and interchangeable in reproductive biology, and all this "it's the same thing" is INANE.

Depends on how you look at this. His genetic material was used for a purpose he did not agree too and now people are saying he is liable for the consequences of that. I woman can have her genetic material fraudulently obtained as well. Are you saying that the woman is liable for what happens to it?

I feel sorry for the man but, there could be more to this that we know. If not, it's essentially, the same as women who set out to conceive naturally without their partners knowing. I know two people who have done that, and are quite open about it. There are allegations of fraud here too which changes things.
Regardless of the circumstances, he should be putting his child first.

No one should be allowed to terminate their parental responsibility unless it's in the interest of the child.

The mans behaviour is appalling, the embryo was already created. It is no way comparable to stealing sperm from a condom.

I've read the judgement HE IS WILLINGLY PAYING MAINTENANCE DESPITE THE MOTHER SAYING SHE DIDN'T WANT IT!!!

He sees and provides for both the children.

It's full of emails and the Mum sounds like a fucking psycho.

She's going at him for saying the child is unwanted but she was and it's the mother's fault the child has to know that.

I feel sorry for the man but, there could be more to this that we know

Such as?? The man is a victim in this. A woman gets pregnant against her consent and she has the option to terminate. Why doesn't a man get the same right to walk away?

I'm trying to put myself in his position here. So imagine an IVF clinic used my egg instead of another womans and she then gave birth to my child, discovered early on that this was actually my child and I was then handed this child to raise or given the option to raise the child or not.

Well, firstly I be fucking furious. It would have MASSIVE implications for my future plans, I feel like I'm steadily moving towards where I want to be in life for the first time ever - another child would destroy that. The impact on my mental health would be dangerous (I have bipolar disorder). Then I'd have to factor how this impacts my existing child - he would then have to share his mother with someone else and also any future inheritance. Aside from that I wouldn't be able to do so much with child 1 because of the age difference (activities wouldn't be suitable for both) and I wouldn't be able to afford it!

So I can understand this mans point of view. I would love that child and raise that child and hope I didn't resent him/her at a later date. I would however sue the clinic and would want the average cost of raising a child from birth - 18, plus I'd want them to factor in loss of earnings, therapy etc I'd want BIG payout from that situation ... but that wouldn't mean I don't love the child. There would be no reason for the child to even know this until they were older.

I wonder if there is a strong correlation here between those who are anti-abortion and those who are arguing that the embryo was his so he is liable even when he didnt give consent to its use.

For some there seems to be no consideration for the man and what his intent was. Consenting to its implantation is the same as having sex with the hope of conceiving. Intent for a child. Having IVF with multiple embryos is not the same as having sex.

If this was turned on its head, and this desperate Father turned up and had a surrogate fraudulently sign in the name of his Ex to be implanted with their fertilised egg, would this conversation even be happening of whether she owes maintenance for a life she never wanted after the break up, or would he be sat in prison now

You seem to be suggesting he'd be in prison, unless I've misread. What criminal offence do you think he might have been convicted of?

As i said on page one, there is precedence.
Woman stole mans sperm from condom, after ons. She got pregnant and he was found legAlly liable for maintenance.
And the woman admitted to do it. Must have been 10-15 years ago.

I don't understand why the mother's not in jail for fraud right now, though fraud doesn't even begin to cover how vile what she did is.