Frozen embryos case - women lost. What do you think?

[Tinker]

Does anyone disagree with this judgement today? Seems painful but right to me. Anyone else think anything else?

Tinker I agree with you. I feel for these women, especially as I think for 1 of them it is her only hope of having her own child. However, if the ex partners do not want the embryos implanted the judge has ruled correctly IMO. Otherwise we would be 'forcing' these men to become Fathers.

But I totally understand these women, and why they have fought all the way.

Sadly I think I do agree. Although it is worth reflecting that in the case of an existing pregnancy, legally the father has no say whatsoever as to whether the pregnancy should continue or be terminated. Logically this isn't so different from this case where the embryos already exist, the decision is whether to allow them to die or give them the opportunity for life. The only difference is that they are currently in cold storage rather than inside the mother. In law of course there is no case, if the father does not agree to the embryos being implanted. V v sad for the woman.

I agree too. I also agree with the Judges ruling that the embryos should not be destroyed before any appeals etc.

Also thought they made the right judgement in an incredibly difficult situation. If the fathers were wanting to use the embryos without the mothers permission then I doubt it would have got even this far in court.

Why weren't eggs frozen rather than embryos though? I thought there were risks of damage over time so it was "preferable" to store as eggs rather than embryos? Or am I getting confused? Or is it more expensive to store multiple eggs rather than fewer viable embryos?

GeorginaA, its not yet possible to freeze eggs (although it is something being actively researched). Just embryos and sperm.

That's odd. I must be getting confused then. I'm sure someone told me her friend was getting her eggs frozen as she was having to undergo medical treatment that would sterilize her (and she was really young so wouldn't have had a partner).

Obviously got the wrong end of the stick (

um that was supposed to be a not a ... apologies.

Elliot, re: your comment on a Father having no right to say wether or not a pregnancy should continue when the mother is already pregnant. This is because(assuming baby is concieved naturally)there is no way the man can 100 % prove that he is the Father if that unborn child, so therefore can not decide it's future. The Father of a child can only be proved by DNA once baby is born. In this case we ovbiously know who the Father is.

Hang on Northener, surely a man has no right to insist that a pregnancy be terminated against the mother's wishes even if it's somehow 100% certain that he is the father.

Message withdrawn

no - I think it has to be right, if you think of it the other way around - should the father be allowed to use the embryos without the mothers permission (eg to implant into a new partner)? If no (which I think must be the case) then the same should go for the other way around. they were created jointly, they should be treated as jointly owned and both parties should agree at each step what happens to them...

dadslib, once the embryos are implanted in the woman, you then have to take into account both the unborn child AND the woman. any forcible abortion/mnorning after pill etc is an assault on the woman. with frozen embryos the woman's body is not involved so you go back to basics and just look at the embryo and ownership of it. perhaps not a very sentimental way of looking at it, but there isn't much room for sentiment in the law I'm afraid.

Message withdrawn

Hmm. all comes down to the law in the end though - presumeably even the HEFA is subject to judicial review etc. think I'm also happier with these sort of major principles being dealt with at law rather than by an ethics committee. ethics committee could then apply the principles, but someone has to agree what they are first.

minefield though, definitely, but artificial embryo creation was never going to be anything else!!

GeorginaA, you not really wrong- it's been possible to freeze eggs properly for ages, it's just that thawing them and getting them to fertilize and implant successfully was been a problem. It is now possible, so lots of people are starting to get their eggs frozen prior to chemotherapy, for example.

Freezing of eggs hasn't been going on for that long, and no-where as long as the freezing of embryos.

Depends what you mean really- it's been possible to freeze eggs successfully for at least the last 10 years in terms of research, but it has only been done and resulted in successful pregnancy clinically in the last few years.

I feel so sad that the men who now say they had doubts while the egg harvesting etc was going on didn't say so at the time. Then their partners could have opted for egg freezing instead of or as well of fertilisation by partner or donor sperm. I really think it was utterly awful to let that happen if you had the slightest doubt you'd go through with it. I'm not surprised the women are so angry and distraught. However, I think this case will mean that egg freezing rather than embryo freezing will become routine, despite the higher success rate with embryos, and that might save some other poor woman going through this awful business. I honestly can't imagine how they will cope when their embryos are 'killed', which is, I'm sure, how they will see it. I was very shocked recently to find out that egg freezing was not routinely offered to young childless women facing being left sterile by cancer treatment. That just seems so wrong to me.

BTW the freezing's always been the easy bit, it was the defrosting where things went wrong. New developments in egg defrosting have overcome most of the problems and it is now a pretty successful procedure, if still unusual.

But can you imagine how hard it might have been for those men at the time though? Presumably their relationships with their partners were pretty strong and, I imagine, it would be quite easy to get swept along in wanting to do the 'right thing' for them. Maybe not easy just more difficult to express doubts when it is so important to the female partner.

I see what you are saying Tinker, but both said they felt doubts about their relationship at the time. I think a bit of counselling or just the routine offering of egg freesing will be the way forward. This should never happen again.

IMO it was just a tradgedy waiting to happen.
agree with everyone that it should not happen again. Very sad for both the men and women

I know what you're saying pph, and I'm def. not having a go at you, but the thought of talking about these embryos as property is just so horrible.
I agree that it's a really tough decision, made even harder by the fact, perhaps that one of the women at least, this is her only chance of bearing her own child.

Regarding men's rights, people have mentioned the man forcing the woman to abort, but as the law stands, the men have no rights, and is this fair? I mean, what about the mwen whose partners decide they want the abortin, and the father has no right at all, and can merely stand back while the woman goes ahead. But it is so tough, and like it's been said, you can't 100% establish paternity until the baby is born (is this really true? I don't know).

As already been said as well though, it's be a totally different story if the men wanted to use the embryos.

I can't stop thinking about this case.

And the idea that the men had doubts at the time makes it much worse (the bastards. Especially the one whose partner had cancer treatement).

What I really don't understand though is why they couldn't allow the embryos to be implanted, but relieve the sperm donors of any responsibility. Not a perfect solution, but perhaps a kinder one?

Message withdrawn