{"id":186120,"date":"2018-08-03T11:35:44","date_gmt":"2018-08-03T16:35:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=186120"},"modified":"2018-08-06T17:33:22","modified_gmt":"2018-08-06T22:33:22","slug":"ivf-custody-battle-stranger","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/ivf-custody-battle-stranger\/","title":{"rendered":"In IVF battle, judge says mother can’t bear baby, ‘but a stranger could’"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

Who gets the embryos? That’s the question a Washington Post article posed recently<\/a>, as it explored the ethical and legal dilemmas that have resulted when frozen embryos represent a past relationship — and the turning of the tide with judges who are asked to rule in these situations. The Post reports<\/a>:<\/p>\n

With the number of frozen embryos in the United States soaring into the millions, disputes over who owns them are also on the rise. Judges have often \u2014 but not always \u2014 ruled in favor of the person who does not want the embryos used, sometimes ordering them destroyed, following the theory that no one should be forced to become a parent.<\/em><\/p>\n

But, as the story notes, the reality of life — something clearly evidenced by science — is now causing judges to rule in the other direction, and in Arizona, they have to<\/a>\u00a0“grant custody of disputed embryos… to the party who intends to help them ‘develop to birth.'”<\/p>\n

\u201cMost people believe that frozen embryos should have a chance at life,\u201d state Sen. Nancy Barto, a Phoenix Republican, said in introducing the bill inspired by Torres\u2019s case.<\/em><\/p>\n

The legislation could dramatically alter the practice of fertility medicine, as well as the debate over when life begins. It is already fueling an argument by some conservative groups that frozen embryos are not mere tissue over which people may exercise ownership rights but human beings who should be accorded rights of their own.<\/em><\/p>\n