[[{“value”:”According to a ruling from Alabama’s Supreme Court, freezing embryos produced through in vitro fertilization are children and have the same constitutional protections as “unborn children.”
According to The Hill, a group of in vitro fertilization ( IVF ) patients whose frozen embryos were destroyed in December 2020 when they were taken out of cryogenic storage units and dumped on the ground brought this majority decision before the court.
According to the theory, a “wandering patient” entered the area where freezing embryos were kept at The Center for Reproductive Medicine in Mobile and dropped some containers.
Three couples whose embryos were destroyed filed a lawsuit against the fertility clinic, according to the Alabama Political Reporter.
Due to the fact that Alabama’s” Wrongful Death of a Minor Act” did never apply to embryos, the lawsuit was dismissed by the circuit court judge.
According to the Alabama Supreme Court, frozen embryos are considered” children” https ://t.co/q3D2qSrSnd pic. twitter.com/OfPJIJspGQ
The Hill ( @thehill ) on February 20, 2024
According to the Alabama Political Reporter:
The trial court stated in dismissing the cases that” the cryopreserved, in vitro embryos involved in this case do not fit within the definition of a “person.”
As a result, the plaintiffs had no further claims to make, apart from any breach of contract. Because Alabama law forbids the recovery of damages from a third party who has n’t been physically injured, the court was unable to award damages for wrongful death.
But, Justice Jay Mitchell overturned the lower court, created a number of fresh and inventive legal avenues, and most likely rendered IVF treatments in Alabama unaffordable by writing for the court’s majority. ALSC Chief Justice Tom Parker turned the opinion into a citation of bible verse in his letter of agreement.
According to Parker,” When the People of Alabama adopted ( the” sanctity of life” provision of the state constitution, they did not use the word “inviolability” with its secular connotations, but rather they chose the term” sacrifice,” with all of its meanings. This kind of acceptance is not unusual to our Constitution, which declares that” all men are endowed with life” by their Creator and invokes the favor and guidance of Almighty God in its preamble. A fundamental tenet of English common law that has been specifically designed as part of Alabama law is highlighted by the Alabama Constitution’s recognition that mortal life is a gift from God.
Observe:
According to the Alabama Supreme Court, a person can be held accountable for destroying frozen embryos because they are children.
The case, according to proponents of biological rights, may have effects on fertility treatments like IVF. pic. PqoJqJhROb/twitter.com
– February 20, 2024, today (@TODAYshow )
The Hill’s perspective:
Although the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling did not address the issue of whether “extrauterine children” should be treated as human beings, it did find that state law did no specify the condition in which an newborn child should reside.
The court’s ruling stated that” the relevant legal text is clear: the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies on its face to all pregnant children, without limitation.”
The court determined that the law that applies to “unborn children who are not physically located “in utero,” that is, inside of a natural “uterus,” at the time of their death, does not have any unwritten exceptions, as the defendants have argued.
The defendants had even argued that keeping frozen embryos as children would have a number of negative effects, such as significantly increasing the cost of IVF and making embryo preservation more “onerous.”
Although we understand the defendants ‘ concerns, the decision stated that these kinds of policy-focused arguments belong before the Legislature, not this Court.
Alabama Supreme Court Justice Jay Mitchell made the decision, and seven of the different eight justices agreed.
In his dissenting opinion, Alabama Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook argued that “expanding the reach of a statute and “breathing life” into it by updating or amending it” is outside the purview of the court.
Cook argued that the state Legislature would need to pass an explicit amendment to make the case because the existing law, which was first passed in 1872, would certainly have taken frozen embryos into account.
Additional news from NBC 15:”}]] [[{“value”:”
Alabama’s Supreme Court has ruled that frozen embryos created through in vitro fertilization are children and entitled to the same legal rights as “unborn children.”
“The court issued this majority decision in a lawsuit brought forth by a group of in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients whose frozen embryos were destroyed in December 2020 when a patient removed the embryos from a cryogenic storage unit and dropped them on the ground,” The Hill reports.
The opinion stems from an incident at The Center for Reproductive Medicine in Mobile where a “wandering patient” entered the area that stored frozen embryos and dropped several containers.
According to the Alabama Political Reporter, three couples whose embryos were destroyed sued the fertility clinic.
A circuit court judge tossed out the lawsuit because Alabama’s “Wrongful Death of a Minor Act” did not cover embryos.
Alabama Supreme Court rules frozen embryos are “children” https://t.co/q3D2qSrSnd pic.twitter.com/OfPJIJspGQ
— The Hill (@thehill) February 20, 2024
Per the Alabama Political Reporter:
“The cryopreserved, in vitro embryos involved in this case do not fit within the definition of a ‘person,'” the trial court wrote in dismissing the cases.
As such, there were no claims remaining – aside from a breach of contract – for the plaintiffs to make. The court couldn’t award damages for wrongful death and Alabama law prohibits the recovery of damages from a third-party who hasn’t suffered physical injury.
However, writing for the court’s majority, Justice Jay Mitchell reversed the lower court, opened up several new and creative avenues for future lawsuits and likely made IVF treatments in Alabama unaffordable. Writing in a concurring opinion, ALSC Chief Justice Tom Parker turned the opinion into a citation of Biblical scripture.
“When the People of Alabama adopted (the ‘sanctity of life’ provision of the state constitution), they did not use the term ‘inviolability,’ with its secular connotations, but rather they chose the term ‘sanctity,’ with all of its connotations,” Parker wrote. “This kind of acceptance is not foreign to our Constitution, which in its preamble ‘invok[es] the favor and guidance of Almighty God,’ … and which declares that ‘all men … are endowed [with life] by their Creator.’ The Alabama Constitution’s recognition that human life is an endowment from God emphasizes a foundational principle of English common law, which has been expressly incorporated as part of the law of Alabama.”
WATCH:
The Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are children and that a person can be held liable for destroying them.
Reproductive rights advocates say the case could have implications for fertility treatments such as IVF. pic.twitter.com/PqoJqJhROb
— TODAY (@TODAYshow) February 20, 2024
From The Hill:
In its decision, the Alabama Supreme Court did not address the question of whether “extrauterine children” should be treated as human beings, but it did find that state law did not specify what state an unborn child is to be in.
“The relevant statutory text is clear: the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies on its face to all unborn children, without limitation,” the court’s decision stated.
The court found that there is no unwritten exception, as the defendants have argued, to the law that applies to “unborn children who are not physically located ‘in utero’ — that is, inside a biological uterus — at the time they are killed.”
The defendants had also argued that considering frozen embryos as children would result in numerous consequences, including making IVF substantially more expensive and preserving embryos more “onerous.”
“While we appreciate the defendants’ concerns, these types of policy focused arguments belong before the Legislature, not this Court,” the ruling stated.
The ruling was issued by Alabama Supreme Court Justice Jay Mitchell, with seven of the other eight justices concurring.
Alabama Supreme Court Justice Greg Cook argued in his dissenting opinion that it’s not within the court’s role to “expand the reach of a statute and ‘breathe life’ into it by updating or amending it.”
Cook argued the existing law, first enacted in 1872, would not have taken frozen embryos into account and would require the state Legislature to pass an explicit amendment to make the argument.
More coverage from NBC 15:
“}]]
