Man can use Embryo

[herecomesthespiderbrooch]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-61907659

And what this article leaves out is- what is this man going to do with this embryo?

This embryo's genetic mother has died, even before it implants. If this chap 'uses' this embryo, is the mother who grows that embryo into a baby going to be allowed to parent them? Or is it going to be loss after loss for this human?

How does a widower "use" an embryo... I feel like we're in The Life of Brian "are you going to grow it in a box?!"

In the past when I have read of court cases where women have wanted to use the sperm of a deceased man it has never sat quite right with me but I could never quite put my finger on why. This ruling is it, the 'obvious' next step and the reason I always felt uncomfortable about the whole scenario.

I don't agree with the current legislation that states a birth mother is the legal mother - overriding any biological/genetic connection.

So I wouldn't have an issue in this scenario other than the fact she didn't deliberately give her consent at the start of treatment. Women are very quick to claim their entitlement to having a child without a father so fairs fair really?

I did question the paperwork myself when doing IVF - I could transfer any embryos if my husband was declared dead or incapacitated assuming he ticked the box on the consent forms but he wouldn't be able to use them if that happened to me. There is in fact no box to tick on the Woman's version of paperwork

Both are creepy. How do you think a child would react when it discovers it came from a dead person?
There comes a point when a widow,/widower has to let go of a deceased partner.

Women having the posthumous babies of dead men is something that occurs in nature, isn’t in? Not the other way around.

Diane Blood was given the right to extract sperm from her husband when he was in a coma. Which I thought was vile.

I do not support surrogacy in any circumstances but I don't find this case any worse than any other surrogacy situation.

It only "occurs in nature" if the women were impregnated before their husbands died.

I'm uncomfortable with this being done without his late wife's consent. If I died I wouldn't want a surrogate giving birth to my baby. And I wouldn't want my child growing up without its mother.

Deliberately depriving a child of its mother contravenes its human rights

I feel this is worse than 'usual' surrogacy cases, because the genetic mother is already dead, so this baby has already got a loss to process. And then the father is CHOOSING to create a child with a further loss, on top of the loss of the genetic mother. A child deliberately made to be motherless twice.

It might be 'fair' to the father, but where's the fairness to the embryo?

Lots of women deliberately create fatherless children - if they use anonymous donors they will never know anything about their father

Lots of women deliberately have children that are not genetically related to them by use of double donors - again quite feasible they could use both anonymous donors

I guess it depends on your stance on use of donors generally and whether you consider the woman who gives birth to a child the legal mother or moral/ ethical one? And which one is more important to you?

At least the donor has consented. In this case, the mother did not consent to her egg being used to create a child after her death.

From the embryo fairness point of view, I don't see big difference between women and man keeping it for future, will be a parent down, but one loving is still good proposition.

In the same time, I am very concerned around surrogacy, I don't support normalisation of monetising bodies - I don't see that big difference between renting a womb and selling a kidney.

He is an idiot!

I stumbled upon the born through anonymous sperm donor community on TikTok - they give some interesting perspective on how the fertility industry and the ‘wants’ of their parents have impacted them.

My stance is that this is completely unethical both in relation to the unborn child and the dead mother. It’s also unethical for a woman to use a dead man’s sperm or implant an embryo made from a dead man’s sperm for that matter.

I think that’s actually an unfair thing to say. His wife died of what I imagine is an extremely rare compilation of pregnancy so it would be unlikely to happen again it’s not something unique to the mothers’ of just this one persons child it could happen to anyone and you could argue it is rare so even less likely to happen to him a second time.

In any case surely the surrogate can make choices about her own body and the risks she’s prepared to take ?

I wish him the best of luck

*complication

I would be quite confident that if he is successful and the baby is born that as long as he meets his/her needs there will be no ‘loss to process’ how can a baby feel loss for something it can’t even understand? I have a friend whose wife passed away shortly after birth their baby is 6 now and for the first few years was obviously oblivious and as she’s got older things have been explained to her and she is happy, well adjusted, understands in a he appropriate way what happened and it’s not the disaster you think it will be- as long as a child’s physical and emotional needs are met they will be fine in situations like this

Lost - how can you say that? I know people who’ve lost their mothers feel that they are ‘fine’ until suddenly being hit with grief years later - when they have their own children for eg. You don’t know what they 6 year old you know will feel as a teenager, hopefully they will continue to be happy, but they are bound to have moments of, at the very least, wondering and ‘what if…’. And was a sad situation of circumstance, this case is a deliberate choice. I wonder how his wife’s parents feel?

Yes , they may have those moments im not denying that but they could be few and far between. Loss is a part of life though and I would assume that even if they do have times of sadness about the situation it won’t overshadow their whole life.We have to make the best of things when things aren’t ‘perfect’. Better to have lived and lost than not to have lived at all.
Im sure if this man is success his child will be loved and happy

What if the man isn’t a ‘success’? What if his motivation is selfish?

If this chap 'uses' this embryo, is the mother who grows that embryo into a baby going to be allowed to parent them?

Chap is a bit demeaning don't you think? He is not some 17 yr old on a whim.
He is a widower with the embryos already created. Obviously the surrogate is not going to parent the baby - as she is not the parent.

It’s a logical combination of two legal principles that you can create a baby from a deceased person’s embryo and you can have a baby via surrogacy. I have to say it doesn’t really sit well with me either but I’m also not keen on the idea of a single man nor a couple using a surrogate.

Hmm, I was Thinking this scenario is a little different & could understand him wanting to grow the embryo, despite being generally against surrogacy. Then read & think Yy to @greenacrylicpaint & @LoobiJee. Don't think I would risk it if I were allowed, as the history isn't optimistic for baby or mother.

I can imaging that longing though. It's a sad situation

I note his poor wife died of a uterine rupture at 18 weeks. I don’t believe another woman should now take on that risk to provide him with a baby. Very sad all round.

Reading this thread I'm reminded of this...a single man commissions the birth of a child but "he gave the baby up for adoption due to serious regret".

twitter.com/WombsNotForRent/status/1511406587453358083?s=20&t=xXYOFY1AkX5bCHHEDCm9cA

(I'm not suggesting this applies to this man but surrogacy does go wrong.)