{"id":156878,"date":"2016-11-18T08:58:12","date_gmt":"2016-11-18T13:58:12","guid":{"rendered":"\/news\/?p=156878"},"modified":"2016-11-18T14:23:52","modified_gmt":"2016-11-18T19:23:52","slug":"judge-rules-that-frozen-embryos-are-property","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/judge-rules-that-frozen-embryos-are-property\/","title":{"rendered":"Was a judge right to rule that a couple’s frozen embryos are ‘property’?"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

In 2006, husband and wife Justin Gadberry and Jalesia McQueen decided to start trying to have children. Through in vitro fertilization, four embryos were created by April 2007 and by November, McQueen had given birth to twin boys. But the other two embryos remained frozen. Six years later, the couple divorced — and disagreed about what should happen to the frozen embryos. Gadberry did not want McQueen to give birth to his two remaining preborn children, while McQueen believed that they were human beings. The disagreement went to trial, and a judge ruled in favor of Gadberry<\/a>, declaring that the embryos are “property” that could be destroyed.<\/p>\n

Gadberry claimed that if McQueen gave birth to the two children, it would violate his constitutional rights by forcing him to have children that he does not want. His lawyer, Tim Schlesinger, celebrated the ruling. \u201cI think today\u2019s ruling is a victory for individuals against unjustified government intrusion,\u201d he said. \u201cWe don\u2019t want the government telling when to have children or whether to have children.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n