I’m struggling to see what inconsistency you’re seeing in the first place.
The penalties for battery on a woman versus battery on a pregnant woman that results in a miscarriage.
If miscarriage means more penalties then it seems penalties for disposing of embryos is appropriate.
There might be more to it but that doesn’t in itself mean that the fetus is considered a person. In NYS , there is a crime called “abortion” in the section of the law that deals with homicide and related offenses. The definition of the crime is
he commits an abortional act upon a female, unless such abortional act is justifiable pursuant to subdivision three of section 125.05.
and that section further defines “justifiable” as being performed by a physician with the consent of the woman and either within 24 weeks or under a reasonable belief that it is necessary to preserve the woman’s life. It also defines a person as
a human being who has been born and is alive.
So if my boyfriend throws me down a flight of stairs intending to cause a miscarriage he has committed at least two crimes, one for the assault on me and the other for intending to cause a miscarriage.
ETA - I would have no problem with penalties for the situation in Alabama if it was based on the fact that the donors did not consent to the destruction rather than the embryos being “children” .
There seems to be some massive leap of logic that I’m missing.
First of all, embryos are not fetuses. Second, the additional crimes can be based on the unwanted miscarriage/abortion part of it, not the fetus-as-human part of it as I described and @doreen does a better job explaining.
Some states probably increase the penalties because they’re trying to shoehorn personhood onto fetus and embryos, but others do it the way that @doreen described.
Does it matter where the embryo is as regards the law?
Is Alabama making this distinction?
It used to, for sure. IVF isn’t banned in other states where abortion is banned.
Alabama isn’t. Alabama is being consistent in that they’re treating embryos in the womb or outside the same as fetuses and the same as children (for some purposes). NY is also consistent, since it’s not assigning personhood to embryos. I’m still not sure what you’re looking for.
Since embryos are legally “children” and, if you have an embryo that reaches the age of 6 by September 1st, you must start obeying the compulsory attendance law which states that you are in violation of the law if you do not register your child. Hey, if we’re going that route … … …
If I cause a miscarriage is that different than if I dispose of an embryo? If so, why?
Put another way, if Alabama is consistent in its laws why should an abortion not be ok (per their laws) but disposal of an embryo should be ok?
(FTR: I am absolutely pro-choice.)
Intent matters in law. If I miscarriage through no action of my own, there’s no criminal intent. If I intentionally dispose of a embryo-child, then there is. (From that one judge’s perspective, maybe it’s “miscarriages are God’s will” for all I know)
An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. There’s no one pregnant with an embryo sitting in a freezer.
This is all part of the playbook. “Pro-life” activists have learned that explicit, draconian bans are unpopular with the voting public. But they can have the same effect by crafting ambiguous abortion laws that put providers at risk of imprisonment should a prosecutor second-guess their interpretation of the law in a specific instance.
And so, you end up with the Kate Cox situation in Texas, where her doctor judged that her need for an abortion met the “threatens the life or serious impairment of a major bodily function of the mother” exception but stood to go to prison for 99 years if a Texas jury ended up disagreeing. And meanwhile lawmakers can hold themselves blameless, since it’s the doctor making the decision not to perform the abortion.
Since you will not accept “the intervening assault and battery on the woman” I’m not sure what else anyone could say.
You didn’t answer the question.
I am not a lawyer, but i don’t think “defrosting an embryo and inserting it into a womb” counts as killing or abusing it. My guess is that women who already have frozen embryos will, after the companies think about it a bit, be able to implant them. But creating new embryos, freezing them, and (God forbid) discarding them are all things that look legally dangerous.
I wonder if it will be possible to move embryos out of state. Frozen things can be shipped, after all.
Ditto.
Yeah. I think it would be incredibly dangerous to implant embryos in a person who doesn’t have a healthy uterus to catch them.
No, it is worse, because you have significantly damaged the woman. Just as is you beat a woman and put our her eye it’s worse than if you beat her and she gets a black eye that heals in a week or two.
Penalties for disposing of someone else’s embryo certainly seen appropriate. It’s a very valuable piece of property, and hard to replace.
I should have been clearer. I was referring to the egg retrieval that happens in an IVF cycle.
Fly into Alabama, get them implanted, fly back to a non-theocratic state and get an abortion?
My initial proposal wasn’t serious, of course.
Fwiw, i know a woman who has hired a surrogate to gestate an embryo from one of my friend’s eggs. So my friend did the “take hormones to extract an egg” part close to home. But the surrogate lives in another state, and has done quite a lot of travel as part of this process. All of the surrogate’s medical care to date has been in my friend’s state. (I assume the routine pregnancy care will be at home.) They’ve set it up this way because the laws regarding embryos vary by state, and they don’t want to risk legal issues that an embryo might get ensnared in. Whereas women are allowed to freely travel in almost all the states. (There are a few states the surrogate has agreed to avoid for the duration of the pregnancy.)
Yes, that appears to be illegal in Alabama. Or at least, much too legally risky for anyone to publicly engage in. Which pretty much means no decent companies can do it.
So i guess we totally agree.
One workaround may be for an Alabama fertility company to perform the retrieval, ship to an out of state company to complete the fertilization and send viable embryos back to Alabama for implanting. It’s a lot of extra steps, at an increased cost and for no patient gain, but it would probably get around the Alabama limitations (nonsense).