{"id":191639,"date":"2018-11-30T11:17:40","date_gmt":"2018-11-30T17:17:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.liveaction.org\/news\/?p=191639"},"modified":"2018-12-01T02:47:53","modified_gmt":"2018-12-01T08:47:53","slug":"six-preborn-killed-colorado-divorce","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.liveaction.org\/news\/six-preborn-killed-colorado-divorce\/","title":{"rendered":"Six preborn children may be killed in Colorado couple’s divorce settlement"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>

A Colorado couple is fighting over whether their preborn children will be allowed to live or be destroyed. Drake and Mandy Rooks were married for 12 years before they divorced in 2014, after having three children together. While married, they had struggled with infertility, and turned to in vitro fertilization (IVF) to conceive their three children. But they also created six additional embryos, which became a problem after the divorce.<\/p>\n

Drake did not want any more children; Mandy did. Drake wanted the embryos destroyed; Mandy wanted to keep them frozen. And so a court battle was spawned, with judges forced to decide if the children get to live or die. The Thomas More Society has filed an amicus curiae (\u201cfriend of the court\u201d) brief on behalf of the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists with the Colorado Supreme Court in support of Petitioner Mandy Rooks. Previously, a district court and the Colorado Court of Appeals court awarded custody to Mr. Rooks, but the Colorado Supreme Court sent the case back, demanding that certain factors be considered, and others kept out of the decision. Factors such as finances, the couple’s born children, and the ability to adopt a child were deemed inappropriate, and the lower court was instructed to balance both parties’ interests fairly.<\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0Michelle Obama reveals miscarriage, says daughters conceived via IVF<\/a><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Thomas More Society Special Counsel Rita Gitchell explained the issues with the case in a statement.<\/p>\n

\u2026 Courts are relying on case law extracted from old, out-of-date science, that had not yet understood that the embryo is already fully formed and alive even before it is implanted in the womb.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u2026 [T]hose who provide an egg and a sperm which unite to become an embryo become genetic parents once they unite, it is not a fact that while the embryos are developing, the parents are \u2018becoming genetic parents\u2019, which would be comparable to suggesting that a woman who is seven months pregnant is \u2018becoming pregnant.\u2019 Until the courts or legislatures grasp the facts of created life, neither the Constitutional rights of parents to protect their created offspring will not be protected, nor are the human rights of the embryo will not be protected. As a result, human embryos are being treated like chattel or property, just like slaves in the pre-abolition era.<\/em><\/p>\n

The Washington Post noted<\/a> that this is just the latest of embryonic custody battles across the country, with inconsistent court rulings sometimes coming in favor of the parent wanting to keep the preborn babies, and other times in favor of the parent who wanted them destroyed.<\/p>\n