Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Woman Loses Fight to Use Her Frozen Embryos

170 replies

expatinscotland · 07/03/2006 11:01

This woman had her ovaries removed due to ovarian cancer. She had eggs fertilised w/her former partner's sperm. They were together when she had them fertilised, of course, w/his permission. Then he w/drew that permission.

Whaddya think?

\link{http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4779876.stm\woman loses fight}

OP posts:
hannahsaunt · 07/03/2006 11:44

The legal situation was in place before the embryos were created. It has always been the case that in the event of a separation any frozen embryos could not be used without the consent of both parties. She would have known this from the outset but I guess at the time you don't think that splitting up could ever happen. I wanted to do my honours dissertation on the property rights of embryos within the context of family law (1995/96) and it was refused as a topic because the law is very, very clear and there was no argument to be had.

I do think the right decision has been made. When you think of what's happening with sperm donors and parental responsibilities etc parenthood cannot be forced upon someone with the attendant responsibilities that it carries for the rest of life. He did say that he did not regard this as a victory.

I feel desparately sad about the whole affair and it reinforces my (probably very contraversial) view that embryos should not be commodities to be frozen and stored and used or disposed of at will...

katzg · 07/03/2006 11:46

what if the boot were on the other foot though and it was him trying to use these embryos, what if these were his last chance of a baby, can you honestly say that you would want him to be able to use them, he could find a suggroate uterus to grown them in and bring them up with another women, can't see people championing his corner in quite the same way

wannaBe1974 · 07/03/2006 11:47

katzg I was just about to write the same thing.

katzg · 07/03/2006 11:48

which bit wannabe? sorry i have a few points!

wannaBe1974 · 07/03/2006 11:49

About if the boot was on the other foot and if this was his only chance to father a child and she was the one refusing.

katzg · 07/03/2006 11:51

its true though, i seem to recall a case when a man went to court to try and stop his ex aborting his baby because he'd just found out he had cancer, i'm sure the press sided with her and how it was her choice!

bundle · 07/03/2006 11:54

just read she's going to appeal

expatinscotland · 07/03/2006 11:57

appeal to whom? i thought that was it.

OP posts:
wannaBe1974 · 07/03/2006 11:58

I think the difference in that situation though is that you can't realistically make a woman carry and give birth to a child she doesn't want, it's her body and at the end of the day if she doesn't want to carry the child that is her choice. I do agree though that if this man had been in a similar situation and had been prepared to go and find a surrogate to carry his children then I don't think that people would have been so sympathetic. It seems to be all about the woman's "right" to have a child, and that they are her children, but at the end of the day, they would be his children as well.

bundle · 07/03/2006 12:00

don't know expat, it was on the bbc news website ticker..says more soon but no full story yet.

katzg · 07/03/2006 12:02

The BBC's for and against cases

BARONESS RUTH DEECH Ex-head of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority

"English law provides very clearly the democratic principle and the principle of autonomy.

"At every stage throughout IVF, the consent of both the man and the woman must be preset and must not be withdrawn.

"It embodies equality between the sexes and consent which is deeply embedded in medical law, especially procreative law."

Baroness Deech said men - like women - should have the right to say no.

The principle of equality is very important

"Women have fought a long hard battle along the lines of no means no.

"And the danger with this advanced science of IVF is that men are gradually being cast aside, whether its cloning or anything else.

"They are being reduced to a sort of genetic blob and, having done their duty in the laboratory, are no longer necessary.

"It's a great shame."

She added: "It's a tragic case, and of course it could have been avoided.

"If Natallie Evans had not had her embryos produced, but had frozen her eggs or even a slice of ovarian tissue, thereby keeping control.

"But the principle of equality is very important.

"I do not think it is the same as a natural pregnancy .

She said there were situations where a woman could make a decision which would end a man's chance of parenthood - say if a man had cancer treatment after his partner became pregnant, and she decided to have an abortion.

"It's very sad, but these things happen when people don't continue with the emotions they once felt towards each other."

JOHN HARRIS
Professor of bioethics at Manchester University School of Law
"These two people made a decision to try to have children.

"Howard Johnston gave his considered, fully informed, consent to fertilisation of the eggs, the creation of the embryos and the 'procreative enterprise'.

"I do not see why he should now be permitted to break this contract and withdraw unilaterally from the procreative enterprise with such disastrous consequences for Natallie.

Normal sexual intercourse is an appropriate model

"This is her last chance to have her own genetic children.

"Normal sexual intercourse is an appropriate model here.

"The man consents to sexual intercourse. If the couple are trying to have children, he consents to the attempt to have children.

"If his partner becomes pregnant, he has no further say in the continuation of that pregnancy and the birth of that child.

"It would be disastrous if the basis of the EU decision was anything to do with the rights of the embryo.

"It has to look objectively at what the two people have to lose - and Natallie Evans has much more to lose than Howard Johnston."

katzg · 07/03/2006 12:03

this is her last chance
Ms Evans is to seek leave to appeal to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights.

Any further legal case would have to occur before October, by which time the embryos will have been in storage for five years, and will have to be destroyed.

LadySherlockofLGJ · 07/03/2006 12:04

She now hopes to appeal to the Grand Jury of the European Court, but still wants her ex-fiancé to change his mind.

hannahsaunt · 07/03/2006 12:04

I'm not sure that we do have a 'right' to have children. I've never been comfortable with the ECHR line on 'right to found (and enjoy?) a family' - I understand the original theory behind it but it does lead to demands such as this one with people saying 'but I have a right...' Do we really?

Would she allow her ex-p's new partner to carry one of the embryos for him to have a baby (assuming for example that he and new partner were both infertile and this was their only way to have a baby)? Maybe there would be less heartache if embryos had never been created.

pashmina · 07/03/2006 12:24

this is on radio 2, jeremy Vine...feel so terrible for her, but her xp does have rights. Can't really understand why he feels so strongly about not allowing her to use her embroyo's.

pashmina · 07/03/2006 12:28

Jeremy Vine just made a valid point, if a man goes out to a night club, meets a girl, they have a one night stand, after he decides he doesn't want tpo be a father...too late.

they decided at some point to freezs embroyos, how heartless to change his mind and deny her a baby..

wannaBe1974 · 07/03/2006 12:33

because it's not just about her using embrio's to have a baby now, this has long-term implications for him as well. Bear in mind if it was the other way round, if you split with a partner and had embrios frozen and he wanted to use them, how would you feel knowing that you had a biological child out there who could come knocking on your door at any moment? This isn't about embrios, this is about potential human beings, and I think that someone should have the right to decide that they do not want to be responsible for bringing another human being into the world. Yes they had embrios frozen, but at all points it would have been made clear that both parties' consent was needed, they've split up now, he shouldn't have to consent to anything, and he shouldn't have to be forced into becoming the parent of children whose mother is someone he does not wish to be associated with.

ruty · 07/03/2006 13:11

if only she'd just had her eggs frozen. feel very sorry for her, and can't help feeling the man is being a bit heartless, though i can see both sides.

pashmina · 07/03/2006 13:14

been thinking about this....I absolutely beleve she should be allowed to use the embroyos.
He should sign something relinquishing of parental rights or finanacial expense.
If the child wants to find him when he/she is an adult, then he can decide if he wants access then.

I am adopted, my biological parents, who I have traced, don't want any contact with me. I accept and respect that. whats the difference? That woman deserves to become a Mum, Why is he denying her?

carla · 07/03/2006 13:16

Expat, I think it's terribly sad. The embryos are going to be destroyed.

Who has the right to them, do you think? The Mum? The Dad? No-one? Who has the right to destroy them?

Flossam · 07/03/2006 13:17

IMO though, this has a lot to do with the principle of it than anything else now. You know when you get so drawn into an argument that you know you will never change your mind? I think she may have had more success by keeping this out of the courts, and not courting such attention, speculation and controversy. It has only served to make her ex fiance more sure of his decision I think. Sad

carla · 07/03/2006 13:21

Agree, Flossam, but don't you think she might have been there, done that, and this was her last resort? I don't know.

gomez · 07/03/2006 13:23

Pashmina - why does she deserve to become a mum? And does he not deserve to chose when or if and with whom he will have children?

I do feel sorry for her, the same as I feel sad for anyone who wants to have children and can not do so. I also have great sympathy for him and believe no child should be concieved without the consent of both parties.

carla · 07/03/2006 13:29

gomez, from what I've seen on TV, he has every opportunity to become a dad, she has none of becoming a mum.

pashmina · 07/03/2006 13:30

why does she deserve not to be a Mum, just because her xfiance has changed his mind?

They agreed at some point to make the embryos, he can change his mind, and affect her life for ever. How can he be so mean?

if he went out and had a one night stand and got somebody pregnant, he couldn't force the woman to have a termination, however he could choose to have nothing to do with then child or the woman. in this case, he agreed to the eggs being fertilised, with a view to having a baby.

Swipe left for the next trending thread