Proceedings in the United States are fuelling the debate about surplus frozen embryos. This is “a battle to keep unborn children” between a divorced couple. This week, the court will hear a couple on the future of their embryos and will pass judgment in three months’ time. This is not the first court action of its kind but in this case “the decision may involve jurisprudence in California”. In fact, in the United States, “the fate of embryos varies according to the jurisdiction in each state”.
Couples with recourse to MAP (medically assisted pregnancy) sign a form when these embryos are created but this does not always state “what will happen if the parties separate”.
In the majority of previous cases, “the law has ruled in favour of the partner who refused procreation, believing that an individual should not be forced into parenthood if he/she does not want this”. However, in two cases, “the court authorised the woman to keep the embryos” because the two women concerned “had undergone chemotherapy, which had left them sterile”.
According to one of the fathers involved, “keeping them in a refrigerator for ever is tantamount to killing them(…) I intend to let this one slide and have a family but that doesn’t mean that I should allow two lives that I have already created to be destroyed or kept in a refrigerator until the end of time”.
Note de Gènéthique:
In the United States, institutions recommend selling surplus areas “without parental consent”.
Le Point (16/07/2015)