To think you’d keep the IVF babies (in the news)?

[AtSea1979]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48908133

They paid £80k for IVF treatments etc so must have really wanted a baby so why wouldn’t they keep them? No matter how shocked and angry they are at the clinic. Presumably she’s given birth to them so they are hers? It’s not like she was a surrogate.

The article I read said they were forced to hand over the babies to the biological parents and that the clinic couldn’t say where this couples embryos went.

It’s a sad and traumatic story for everyone involved.

I don’t understand why they were forced to give the babies up (if that’s what happened) - I thought the law presumed that a surrogate mother is the legal mother of the child, even when there is no genetic link?

Regardless, this is terrible for everyone involved.

A couple of years ago I read the biography of Carolyn and Sean Savage. The wrong embryo was implanted and Carolyn gave birth to a son who wasn't genetically theirs, though the mix up was discovered soon after she found out she was pregnant. I'm pretty sure the law of the US state they lived in said that the genetic parents were the legal parents, and the Savages had to give the baby up. It sounds like it was the same for this couple. It's an awful situation.

Having undergone IVF in California, I struggle to see how this could happen. Everything is labelled, checked, everyone is so scared of screwing up and getting sued. Our resultant baby looks nothing like us and I have wondered in idle moments if there was a mix-up at the clinic, but we love our baby so much I wouldn't care anyway.

I had a friend who did Sex Selection in Greece. They say they put back a baby of one sex, she gave birth to a baby of the other sex.

There is a chance the biological parents of the babies wanted their babies back.

I don’t understand why they were forced to give the babies up (if that’s what happened) - I thought the law presumed that a surrogate mother is the legal mother of the child, even when there is no genetic link?

Which California law is this?

In the UK (currently) the surrogate mother is classed as the legal mother regardless of genetic relatedness though there is a move to change this.

In the UK (currently) the surrogate mother is classed as the legal mother regardless of genetic relatedness though there is a move to change this.

I'm quite intrigued by the legal position. The couple live in New York but the clinic is in California. I wonder which state's laws apply?