Well, let’s see: If we can sue fertility clinics for “wrongful death” for discarding embryos (routine, though accidental in this case), because life “starts at conception”, t’would seem normal IVF protocols expose these services to rather severe liability. Which, naturally, would shut them down.
Hopefully this case will get thrown out at the next level, but still, it’s an ugly ruling, and sets a shitty precedent, if you ask me. Fuck this “culture of life”.
This is an even scarier turn for this “culture of life” phenomenon. Shame on the parents in this case for suing the fertility center for “wrongful death” and shame on the judge for allowing this case. It was a mistake and they seemed more than willing to make-up for that mistake by offering a free IVF treatment (which BTW, many insurance companies do NOT cover and with all treatments can sometimes skyrocket to over $10,000). A fertilized embryo does not a child make.
There’s a good possiblity I will need to have this procedure done sometime in the near future. I’ve decided that with this upswing in these cases, if and when I do get pregnant, I’m taking out life insurance on my fetus. Since eveyone seems to think that life begins at conception, we’ll see what the insurance companies say when women start having miscarriages and want half a million a pop.
Can I just ask that that wide ol’ brush be used a little less freely? After all, the cavalier attitute shown toward the embryos here, and their uncertain legal status, was very much on the mind of some “culture of life” advocates when they opposed IVF in the first place, and oppose it today.
Personal choice can sometimes lead to some horrendous moral dilemmas, as this couple and the court system are finding out. I’m glad I’m not in their shoes, and I’m doubly glad I’m not in the position of the clinic.
Wide ole’ brush? Like those Pink-Unicorn-Worshipping-knuckleheads-who-can’t-butt-the-fuck-out-of-things-that-don’t-concern-their-superstitious-asses kind of wide ole’ brush? I’ll paint how I please, and don’t much care anymore if they think I’m an asshole. Enough’s enough.
I’d be happy to step into the couple’s shoes for a day. I’d accept the offer of a free cycle (or ask for two, if the first should prove unsuccessful) and not file dumbass lawsuits that make me look like a crybaby and which may have the effect of undermining the very technology I was trying to use to start a family.
And were I in the court system’s shoes, I’d tell the couple to take the clinic’s offer or I’d summarily dismiss. No soul-searching required.
I’d be quite happy if people would decide to adopt children instead of resorting to these extreme, unhealthy measures to get pregnant. I guess I’ll never understand straight people. (No, really. I just have absolutely no understanding of this desire to pass on your genetic footprint. It makes no sense to me.) Personally, should I ever decide to have a kid, I figure there’s perfectly decent ones out there already, and there’s no reason to make a new one from scratch.
Adoption, at least in Australia, is a pain in the arse. My uncle and his new wife desparately want kids but can’t adopt because they’re too old - mid 40’s. IVF, is pretty much their only option at this point.
It’s very personal Excalibre. Adoption in NZ and Australia is a nightmare to negotiate but on a personal level as an infertile woman, I’d have chosen to remain childless rather than adopt. We never went the IVF route and I’m not sure I would have chosen to do so but it’s not as clearcut as IVF sucks, adoption rocks. They’re both tremendously hard roads to travel if you’re infertile and adoption isn’t a barrel of laughs even if you’re doing it as a fertile person who chooses to do so.
Personal choice and moral dilemmas have been a large part of the consequences of having a life since the beginning, Mr. Moto.
What happened to people in persistent vegetative states before someone made the personal choice to develop a feeding tube to deliver nutrients to keep their bodies alive? By inventing the device, this person created moral dilemmas. That doesn’t mean that creating the device was a mistake or that the person that created the device was “playing God.”
For all we know, IVF may be one of God’s greatest gifts to the world and a sign of his compassion and tender mercy. It may be his way of bringing into being souls that would not otherwise have existed.
I believe in scientific and medical ethics. I don’t believe in anyone’s right to micro-manage God or serve as a personal interpreter of God’s wishes for me or any of my kin. If I can’t abide by the Law of the land, I have at least two options.
I would not trade one single human being created through the IVF process for all the embryos that have never had a chance to develop.
While this is very commendable, my husband and I have talked about this option in great detail. As a woman, I don’t want to die not knowing how it feels to be pregnant and carry a child to term. Childbirth is scary, but a very fulfilling and emotional experience. It’s unfair the way the cards have played out to us, we are good people who will be wonderful parents. Why should I have to bow to anti-choicers because of a medical issue where there is the technology to help us? Why can’t people just let others live their lives the way they want to? Why does a couple who’s hell-bent on making a quick buck from a lawsuit have to ruin it for people who are legitimately trying to have a family and have to resort to IVF?
I’d just be happy if someone could talk to general public and explain the difference between an 8-celled blastocyst, an embryo and a foetus.
I think that the only reason the couple went for wrongful death is because the current laws on destruction of property or medical negligence wouldn’t apply.
If I’m wrong, and they do, their lawyer needs a kick in the ass.
Personally, I don’t know why anyone who believed life started at conception would have IVF. There is a high probability that more embryos than can be safely implanted will be created. Meaning that they would have to be destroyed or frozen in the mean time. If you didn’t want to use them, and didn’t want anyone else to bear your child, you’d be in a somewhat sticky position, as you’d have to pay to keep the embryos on ice for the forseeable future. Since it’s unlikely that the embryos could survive more than a given period of time, they’d eventually die, whatever you did.
It’s a lot less tricky if you believe that a pregnancy begins at implantation, and human life begins when you start actively living it.
What angers me most about the article is this quote from the judge:
Umm…no, you fuckin’ dumbass, it doesn’t, at least not according to the US Supreme court. How can a man like this be a judge? He seemingly has no concept of federal law, woman’s rights, or the fact that abortions have been legal in Illinois since Roe vs Wade! Hell, even the news article itself later goes on to mention he’s flat-out rong! How can he get away with saying a statement like that? Throw him off the bench!