The Alabama Supreme Court has ruled that frozen embryos can now be lawfully regarded as children under state law, an outcome that critics argue could have important indications for fertility remedy in the state.
Supreme Court Decides that Frozen Embryos Be Legally Treated as 'Children'
The ruling was issued in reply to wrongful death cases involving three couples whose frozen embryos were wrecked in a fertility clinic occurrence.
Justices, implying anti-abortion language in the Alabama Constitution, decided that a state law from 1872 tolerating parents to sue for the death of a minor child applies to all unborn children, regardless of their whereabouts.
According to Justice Jay Mitchell, who wrote the majority ruling for the all-Republican court, unborn children are considered 'children' without exception, regardless of their developmental stage or physical location.
The decision has prompted concerns about its potential impact on fertility treatments, particularly in relation to the previous legal classification of embryos as property.
Critics argue that the ruling essentially considers a fertilized egg, described as a clump of cells, as a legal person.
This decision arose from cases where couples had frozen embryos destroyed in an accident at a fertility clinic.
Advocates for reproductive rights worry that the ruling may disrupt in-vitro fertilization (IVF) practices, affecting the freezing, donation, or destruction of embryos.
Fertility clinics are already feeling the impact, with at least one clinic in Alabama instructed to pause IVF treatments immediately after the ruling.
Varied Opinions on Frozen Embryos
Reproductive health advocates, including Barbara Collura of RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association, express concerns about the potential consequences for individuals impacted by infertility who rely on IVF.
The opinion could impact providers' capability to offer modern healthcare, as it may lead to legal difficulties and influence the possibility of fertility medication.
Supporters of the ruling contend that it advocates the solemnity of unborn life, citing anti-abortion language added to the Alabama Constitution in 2018.
Chief Justice Tom Parker provided a positive opinion in which he mentioned the Bible while conversing the relevance of the phrase "the sanctity of unborn life" in the Alabama Constitution.
According to Parker, all human beings bear the image of God even before birth, and their lives should not be destroyed without diminishing God's glory.
In contrast, Justice Greg Cook, the sole dissenter to the majority opinion, argued that the 1872 law lacked a definition for "minor child" and was being stretched beyond its original intent to cover frozen embryos.
Cook expressed concern over the unprecedented nature of the majority opinion, asserting that no court in the country had reached a similar conclusion.
He further argued that the ruling would possibly put an edge to the creation of frozen embryos through in vitro fertilization (IVF) in Alabama.
The Alabama Supreme Court's ruling was persuaded, in part, by the anti-abortion language added to the state constitution in 2018, intensifying the "public policy of this state to safeguard the protection of the rights of the unborn child."
Supporters initially claimed it reflected voters' beliefs and would have no impact unless states gained more control over abortion access, which did happen in 2022.
However, critics argued that the amendment, essentially a "personhood" measure, could have broader consequences in civil and criminal law beyond abortion access by establishing constitutional rights for fertilized eggs.
Related Article : Tennessee Parents Welcome Twins From Embryos Frozen 30 Years Ago
