frozen embryos

[Juju]

Legally, yes.

Just think it's a very cold way of looking at it. We're not talking about a house or a car.

[TheTramp]

Just think it's a very cold way of looking at it. We're not talking about a house or a car.

True. And I quite sympathise with the humanity issues.

However, when it goes to court, that's the way it'll be looked at!

[TiggsTours]

(Editing because I got muddled!)

I would feel the same way about her as I feel about him. I really don't like this idea of wanting the embryos one minute and then asking for them to be destroyed the next because it no longer suits. They've created embryos and they can't just undo what they've done - at least, I don't think it's right that they can just undo it.

Obviously the idea of them being implanted into someone else is to say the least complicated and that would be an interesting case if it were to come up - has it already??

OK, in that case, I respect you for having your views on this situation, I don't agree with you, but I respect the way you feel.

[David Bailey]

Just think it's a very cold way of looking at it. We're not talking about a house or a car.

What other way can you suggest then?

Do you seriously think the father's rights should be completely ignored? If so, is that just for this case, or for all similar cases?

[Beowulf]

Sure it seems that he may be digging in his heels just to make like difficult for his ex

it doesnt seem like that at all. Why demonise him though?

Am not demonising him..which is Why I said HE MAY and not HE IS. it was a hypothetical statement. It could be.. it may not be.

Perhaps she just wants to have the kids to make his life hell later.. know knows what's going on behind their eyes. it could be she desperately wants to have kids and he desperately doesn't. I personally think that she doesn't have the right to force him to father children he doesn't want.

which is why I voted NO

[Juju]

What other way can you suggest then?

Do you seriously think the father's rights should be completely ignored? If so, is that just for this case, or for all similar cases?

I think he should have thought more carefully before he chose to participate in IVF. Now the deed is done.

If the embryos had been conceived naturally and he didn't want them anymore, should he be allowed to force the woman to have an abortion? Theoretical question I know, but in my opinion an embryo is an embryo, whether it's 'stored ' in its mother or elsewhere, whether it's frozen or not.

[stewart38]

What other way can you suggest then?

Do you seriously think the father's rights should be completely ignored? If so, is that just for this case, or for all similar cases?

Of course !! Then we get to see Batman and Robin climbing Big Ben on Christmas day

[SilverFox]

Frozen embryos?

"That's why mum's gone to Iceland"

[Lory]

However, I don't think she should be able to use them. They are as much his embros as hers. I think it's perfectly understandable that he would not want to have a child with someone he was no longer in a relationship with.

As other people have said, freezing her eggs would have been a better option,

What I think she fails to see, is that time moves on and situations change.
At the time he agreed to have to embryos frozen, for use at a later date, this was surely based on their situation at the time and the fact is, their circumstances HAVE changed..

I mean, at the time, when they got married, he almost certainly would have agreed to have sex with her (consummate the marriage) but there's no way she could ever make that demand of him now.

What if he'd been the one who'd ended up infertile, and she'd decided she didn't want him to use the embryos?

In the programme last night, this was one of the questions put to her. She 'said' she'd be happy for him to have 3 of the 6.

I think the law needs to be tightened in future, so that includes for eventualities, such as break ups and deaths, before the couple enter into it

[Dreadful Scathe]

I think he should have thought more carefully before he chose to participate in IVF.

Im sure he carefully considered it, he participated in IVF with his girlfriend! Thats was a long time ago, now she is no longer his partner.

If the embryos had been conceived naturally and he didn't want them anymore, should he be allowed to force the woman to have an abortion? Theoretical question I know, but in my opinion an embryo is an embryo, whether it's 'stored ' in its mother or elsewhere, whether it's frozen or not.

A frozen embryo is an unnatural way of having children, an abortion is when you interrupt a natural process which is already affecting the mother - the mother is affected in the moment of conception - over the counter pregnancy tests are nearly 100% accurate because of this. You might consider this the same but many would not agree and the law certainly doesn't.

Am not demonising him..which is Why I said HE MAY and not HE IS. it was a hypothetical statement. It could be.. it may not be.

oooh defensive - you said "it seems" which suggest that you were considering this as a possibility, despite your attempt at misdirection by making "he may" bold and underlined But I wasnt suggesting you were personally demonising him, many are though so ironically MY question was hypothetical and not directed at you at all

[Dreadful Scathe]

I mean, at the time, when they got married,

they got married ? cant see any indication to suggest they were anything other than boyfriend/girlfriend !

[purple~emma]

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by TiggsTours
What if he'd been the one who'd ended up infertile, and she'd decided she didn't want him to use the embryos?
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

In the programme last night, this was one of the questions put to her. She 'said' she'd be happy for him to have 3 of the 6.

I didn't see the programme last night but if that is true I think that's terrible, and really is thinking of them as property. If the embyos were 6 born children, would she say, "You take 3 and i'll do that same" if they split up? I doubt it.

I think with the situation as it is, or if the situation was reversed and he was infertile, the embryos should not be able to be used without the consent of both of them.

Ultimately, what kind of life would this child have if it was brought into the world? A child who's father currently doesn't want it (although that may be different if the child was actually born, there are many parents who didn't plan their children but love them regardless of that). And how would the child feel when it grew up and found out the circumstances surrounding it's conception?

It would be unfair on the man to ignore the fact that he ahs a much of a say as the woman does, and it would be unfair for a child to be brought into the world under these circumstances.

[Twirly]

I think he should have thought more carefully before he chose to participate in IVF. Now the deed is done.

This was my first thought on this one. Surely he made his decision that when allowed his sperm to be used to fertilise her eggs?

These people are caught up in a horrible and painful situation. I hope that those who deal with these situations have learnt from it, and that pre-treatment counselling as to the options and possible consequences of the couple's actions are now fully debated. The trouble is, when you are very much in love with someone, the idea that you might split up with them and that they might then deny you something which you long for would probably seem unthinkable.

Maybe a change in the law is required to make it clear to both partners what will happen in the event of consent being withdrawn, or to make it impossible to withdraw consent?

I am wondering why embryos are frozen rather than eggs too. Does it increase the chances of a viable pregnancy? Anyone know?

I also assume that since she is presumably planning on carrying the child to term herself that her plumbing is in working order. I therefore hope that if she loses the battle (as I fear, for her sakes, that she will), that she is able to use another woman's egg to have the child she so longs for.

[Lory]

A frozen embryo is an unnatural way of having children, an abortion is when you interrupt a natural process which is already affecting the mother - the mother is affected in the moment of conception - over the counter pregnancy tests are nearly 100% accurate because of this. You might consider this the same but many would not agree and the law certainly doesn't.

I agree, an abortion, involves the unatural intervention of Doctors to cause to pregnancy to cease

Following this train of thought, without the unatural intervention of Doctors, these embryo's would never result in a pregnacy..

..............

Just as an aside.. until seeing the programme last night, I didn't realise that the embryo's were frozen at early stage, they're only 2 cells, which take less than 24 hours to reach. Wow!

[Lory]

they got married ? cant see any indication to suggest they were anything other than boyfriend/girlfriend !

Sorry, I just assumed

[TheTramp]

Ultimately, what kind of life would this child have if it was brought into the world? A child who's father currently doesn't want it (although that may be different if the child was actually born, there are many parents who didn't plan their children but love them regardless of that). And how would the child feel when it grew up and found out the circumstances surrounding it's conception?

Oh. Come on. There are many 1000's of people these days who never see their fathers, never know who their fathers are, or were 'accidents'.

What difference would 1 more make? If the child grew up with a loving mother, perhaps with a new partner, I'm sure that there would be no more scars than any of the other cases.

And, retrospectively, given a choice, of living, with my father never having wanted me, or not living.... I know which one I'd choose.

[Dreadful Scathe]

What difference would 1 more make?

1 Adolf Hitler can make a lot of difference This is not an issue about what an embryo will beome though, nowhere near that stage.

[TheTramp]

1 Adolf Hitler can make a lot of difference This is not an issue about what an embryo will beome though, nowhere near that stage.

Yes it was. I was replying to a post that someone else had made regarding that issue.

*shrugs*

I'd like to take the previous relationship attachment link out of it.

What happens if a random sperm donor subsequently decides that they don't want their sperm to be used. But it already has been, to fertilise someone's eggs. Do they have the right to demand that the embryo be destroyed in that case.

And if they don't, should the guy involved in this case be, just because of the previous relationship. At the time, he donated (interesting choice of word they have - you generally can't ask for gifts back) his sperm presumably with his consent. If it could be seen as a gift, then it is no longer his property, and he has no recourse to having it destroyed.

[TiggsTours]

they got married ? cant see any indication to suggest they were anything other than boyfriend/girlfriend !

What does that matter?

They were two adults in a (I assume) loving relationship who decided to have embryos frozen in order to conceive a child TOGETHER at some point in the future. They are no longer together, does it matter if they were married or not?

[Barry Shnikov]

Yes.

The guy has rights - more importantly, he has obligations to any children he decides to have, both legally and morally.

If he decides "I won't be a good father, under these circumstances", then the woman does not have the right to effectively appropriate his property against his consent.

The law is clear, both in the UK and in Europe, and she should just accept it, it's not helpful to anybody to pursue this case to such lengths IMO.

I didn't say he didn't have or shouldn't have rights; I am complaining about his decision to exercise them in the way he has.