Alabama's largest hospital paused in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment after a court ruling declared that frozen embryos are legally equivalent to children. The University of Alabama at Birmingham Health System said in a statement that it must assess whether patients or physicians could face criminal charges or punitive damages for providing IVF treatment. “We are saddened that this will affect our patients' attempts to have a baby through IVF,” spokesperson Savannah Koplon said in the statement.
Doctors and patients described a mixture of shock, anxiety and fear as they assessed how to proceed after the all-Republican Alabama Supreme Court issued a ruling that cast doubt on the future of IVF. “Disbelief, denial, all the stages of grief ... I was stunned,” said Dr. Michael C. Allemand, a reproductive endocrinologist at Alabama Fertility. Allemand said they were discussing daily how to proceed. IVF is often the best treatment for patients desperate to have children, he said, and the ruling threatens doctors' ability to provide that care. “The moments our patients want—Christmas morning with grandparents, kindergarten, the first day of school with a little backpack—those are real moments this ruling could take away from patients,” he said.
Gabby and Spencer Goydel of Auburn turned to IVF after three miscarriages. The Alabama ruling came on the same day Gabby began 10 days of daily injections in hopes of becoming pregnant through IVF the following month. “When I saw this ruling, I was furious and hurt that it could stop my cycle. People need to know this affects couples trying to start families—real couples who are trying to live the so-called American dream,” said Gabby Goydel, 26. She said her clinic was still providing treatment but reviewing the situation day by day.
Citing language in the Alabama Constitution recognizing “the rights of unborn children,” the justices said three couples could bring wrongful-death claims after their frozen embryos were destroyed in an accident at a storage facility. “Unborn children are ‘children’ ... without exception based on developmental stage, physical location, or any other ancillary characteristic,” Justice Jay Mitchell wrote in Friday's majority opinion. Mitchell said the court had previously held that a fetus killed while a woman was pregnant was protected under Alabama's Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, and nothing excluded “extrauterine children” from the law's protection.
Alabama Chief Justice Tom Parker wrote in a concurring opinion filled with biblical quotations that "even before birth, all human beings bear the image of God, and their lives cannot be destroyed without effacing his glory."
Although the case focused on whether embryos are protected under the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, some said treating embryos as children rather than property could have broader implications and call many IVF practices into question.
“If this is now a person, can we freeze embryos?” said Barbara Collura, CEO of the National Infertility Association (RESOLVE).
Fertility clinics and hospitals involved in the Alabama case could ask the court to reconsider its decision, or ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the matter, if they believe it conflicts with federal law.
The Alabama Supreme Court's decision was based partly on anti-abortion language voters added to the state constitution in 2018, stating that “it is the policy of this state to ensure the protection of the rights of the unborn child.”
Anti-abortion activist and attorney Eric Johnston, who helped draft the constitutional language, said “the purpose of that was more related to abortion.”
He said its purpose was to clarify that the Alabama Constitution did not protect abortion rights and ultimately paved the way for Alabama to ban abortion once control over abortion rights returned to the states. Opponents of the amendment warned in 2018, however, that it was essentially a personhood measure that could grant rights to fertilized eggs.
“Modern science raises the question: Is a frozen fertilized egg a person? That is the ethical, medical and legal dilemma we now face,” Johnston said.
News | Alabama's largest hospital pauses IVF procedures after court ruling
Alabama's largest hospital paused in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment after a court ruling declared that frozen embryos are legally equivalent to children. The University of Alabama at Birmingham Health System said in a statement that it must assess whether patients or physicians could face criminal charges or punitive damages for providing IVF treatment. “We are saddened that this will affect our patients' attempts to have a baby through IVF,” spokesperson Savannah Koplon said in the statement.
Doctors and patients described a mixture of shock, anxiety and fear as they assessed how to proceed after the all-Republican Alabama Supreme Court issued a ruling that cast doubt on the future of IVF. “Disbelief, denial, all the stages of grief ... I was stunned,” said Dr. Michael C. Allemand, a reproductive endocrinologist at Alabama Fertility. Allemand said they were discussing daily how to proceed. IVF is often the best treatment for patients desperate to have children, he said, and the ruling threatens doctors' ability to provide that care. “The moments our patients want—Christmas morning with grandparents, kindergarten, the first day of school with a little backpack—those are real moments this ruling could take away from patients,” he said.
Gabby and Spencer Goydel of Auburn turned to IVF after three miscarriages. The Alabama ruling came on the same day Gabby began 10 days of daily injections in hopes of becoming pregnant through IVF the following month. “When I saw this ruling, I was furious and hurt that it could stop my cycle. People need to know this affects couples trying to start families—real couples who are trying to live the so-called American dream,” said Gabby Goydel, 26. She said her clinic was still providing treatment but reviewing the situation day by day.
Citing language in the Alabama Constitution recognizing “the rights of unborn children,” the justices said three couples could bring wrongful-death claims after their frozen embryos were destroyed in an accident at a storage facility. “Unborn children are ‘children’ ... without exception based on developmental stage, physical location, or any other ancillary characteristic,” Justice Jay Mitchell wrote in Friday's majority opinion. Mitchell said the court had previously held that a fetus killed while a woman was pregnant was protected under Alabama's Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, and nothing excluded “extrauterine children” from the law's protection.
Alabama Chief Justice Tom Parker wrote in a concurring opinion filled with biblical quotations that "even before birth, all human beings bear the image of God, and their lives cannot be destroyed without effacing his glory."
Although the case focused on whether embryos are protected under the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, some said treating embryos as children rather than property could have broader implications and call many IVF practices into question.
“If this is now a person, can we freeze embryos?” said Barbara Collura, CEO of the National Infertility Association (RESOLVE).
Fertility clinics and hospitals involved in the Alabama case could ask the court to reconsider its decision, or ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the matter, if they believe it conflicts with federal law.
The Alabama Supreme Court's decision was based partly on anti-abortion language voters added to the state constitution in 2018, stating that “it is the policy of this state to ensure the protection of the rights of the unborn child.”
Anti-abortion activist and attorney Eric Johnston, who helped draft the constitutional language, said “the purpose of that was more related to abortion.”
He said its purpose was to clarify that the Alabama Constitution did not protect abortion rights and ultimately paved the way for Alabama to ban abortion once control over abortion rights returned to the states. Opponents of the amendment warned in 2018, however, that it was essentially a personhood measure that could grant rights to fertilized eggs.
“Modern science raises the question: Is a frozen fertilized egg a person? That is the ethical, medical and legal dilemma we now face,” Johnston said.
“It is a very complex issue,” he added.
Story source:
Online sources