Jump to content

Frozen embryos are ‘children,’ Alabama Supreme Court rules in couples’ wrongful death suits


Recommended Posts

WWW.AL.COM

The state's highest court reversed a judge's dismissal of the case involving embryos destroyed by a wandering Mobile hospital patient.

 

 

Quote

Three couples whose frozen embryos were destroyed when a wandering Mobile hospital patient dropped the specimens can sue for wrongful death because the embryos were “children,” the Alabama Supreme Court ruled Friday in reversing a judge’s decision to throw out the case.

 

Quote

The Wrongful Death of a Minor Act “applies to all unborn children, regardless of their location,” wrote Alabama Supreme Court Justice Jay Mitchell. “[T]he Wrongful Death of a Minor Act is sweeping and unqualified. It applies to all children, born and unborn, without limitation. It is not the role of this Court to craft a new limitation based on our own view of what is or is not wise public policy. That is especially true where, as here, the People of this State have adopted a Constitutional amendment directly aimed at stopping courts from excluding ‘unborn life’ from legal protection.”

 

Quote

Mobile Infirmary “allowed one of its patients to leave and/or elope from his or her room in the Infirmary’s hospital area and access the cryogenic storage area,” according to one of the lawsuits.

 

The patient removed embryos from the freezer, and “it is believed that the cryopreservation’s subzero temperatures burned the eloping patient’s hands, causing him or her to drop the cryopreserved embryonic human beings on the floor, where they began to slowly die,” one of the filings stated.

By the time hospital staff noticed the incident, all of the embryos died, according to the lawsuits.

 

  • Guillotine 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TyphoidHater said:

This infuriates me as at the time embryos are frozen for IVF they have, at best, just entered the blastocyst stage and in a natural pregnancy wouldn't even have implanted into the uterine wall yet.


This is terminology the libs invented to trick you into thinking a baby isn’t a baby.

  • True 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, TyphoidHater said:

This infuriates me as at the time embryos are frozen for IVF they have, at best, just entered the blastocyst stage and in a natural pregnancy wouldn't even have implanted into the uterine wall yet.

 

This was a post I was waiting for. 

 

5 minutes ago, Uaarkson said:


This is terminology the libs invented to trick you into thinking a baby isn’t a baby.

 

Are you being sarcastic? Or don't you agree with what was said?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the obvious next step, and as soon as they overturned Roe I knew they would come for IVF next.  

I'm only shocked that it took 2 years to get here. This was the story from May of 2022 that got my blood boiling. 

AMP.CNN.COM

Oklahoma's legislature on Thursday passed a bill that would ban abortions from the stage of "fertilization" and allow private citizens to sue abortion providers who "knowingly" perform or induce an abortion "on a pregnant woman."

 

  • Guillotine 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this was done on purpose then charge the person, not for murder, but this seems to of been an accident. I believe they are the same state that tried to make masturbation = murder. I can’t find it but The Daily Show did a segment about this 5+ years ago. It completely failed but they were gonna charge people for “discharging of potential human life” 
 

Now i can see where some anger over, you know, losing what could have been a family’s last hopes for child. Cause we know using them for research for diseases with embryos is the devil’s work. Then (sadly) get what you can from them in money for a settlement.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, silentbob said:

If this was done on purpose then charge the person, not for murder, but this seems to of been an accident. I believe they are the same state that tried to make masturbation = murder. I can’t find it but The Daily Show did a segment about this 5+ years ago. It completely failed but they were gonna charge people for “discharging of potential human life” 
 

Now i can see where some anger over, you know, losing what could have been a family’s last hopes for child. Cause we know using them for research for diseases with embryos is the devil’s work. Then (sadly) get what you can from them in money for a settlement.

 

 

That's the problem. They didn't lose the embryos on purpose but mistake. This was a judgement for the prosecution as sentiment but this shit runs like bloodvessels in bones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The notion that a fertilized embryo is "a child" is absolutely fucking batshit, as it implicates anyone who has ever had a miscarriage or who had a fertilized egg fail to implant on the uterine wall, which is almost everyone who has ever brought a pregnancy to term, as someone who committed manslaughter. This shit is completely unhinged, and the push for rulings like is only takes place because of the misogynistic and patriarchal desire to control reproduction. It's despicable. 

  • True 2
  • Halal 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

The notion that a fertilized embryo is "a child" is absolutely fucking batshit, as it implicates anyone who has ever had a miscarriage or who had a fertilized egg fail to implant on the uterine wall, which is almost everyone who has ever brought a pregnancy to term, as someone who committed manslaughter. This shit is completely unhinged, and the push for rulings like is only takes place because of the misogynistic and patriarchal desire to control reproduction. It's despicable. 

 

For it to be manslaughter, a law would need to be on the books to warrant miscarriage/failed implantation/etc as criminally negligent homicide with enough directness for culpability.

 

Ultimately, its part of our reproductive biology: humans can and often do die in the early stages of development.  An embryo may not implant.  Miscarriages happen.  Many people don't decide to sympathize with it as a child at these points.  Which is okay, as long as that perspective isn't turned back around into an argument against nature.

As for control, you'd truly have to ban unprotected sex to be consistent with the manslaughter idea.  And you basically doom your society with that in theory.  Which is unhinged, but also not a pro-life argument.

 

I could also draw an analogy to doctors who perform life saving procedures.  There's a high burden of proof to be charged with malpractice if they lose a patient.  If they can be legally protected, for good reason, I don't see how it makes sense to go after women who suffer a miscarriage.

 

Anyways, I’ll be bowing out here because of the past.  Just wanted to offer this perspective.

  • Halal 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

.As for control, you'd truly have to ban unprotected sex to be consistent with the manslaughter idea.  And you basically doom your society with that in theory.  Which is unhinged, but also not a pro-life argument.


No. Birth control can fail. Barrier methods can break or not be used correctly. Hormonal methods are not perfect, nor are IUDs. And so on. If penetrative, vaginal sex could result in a fertilized embryo, why does that potential “child” matter less simply because its existence is less probable? Intentionality makes it manslaughter, not murder. But you can’t play the “that’s just how biology works” card simply because it would make things inconvenient or legally impractical. 
 

EDIT - the simple reality is that if a fertilized embryo is a child, then any fertility clinic that does IVF is participating in the indefinite incarceration and eventual mass execution of children, and the process is one of the greatest moral sins humanity has ever undertaken. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel bad for the parents who had those embryos there for possible children (women have a set number of eggs) but this law is fucking gross and this should just be a damages suit against the hospital/ivf clinic.

  • True 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Kal-El814 said:

The notion that a fertilized embryo is "a child" is absolutely fucking batshit, as it implicates anyone who has ever had a miscarriage or who had a fertilized egg fail to implant on the uterine wall, which is almost everyone who has ever brought a pregnancy to term, as someone who committed manslaughter. This shit is completely unhinged, and the push for rulings like is only takes place because of the misogynistic and patriarchal desire to control reproduction. It's despicable. 

 

like werent some of these shithole states trying to imprison women who had a miscarriage already?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Firewithin said:

 

like werent some of these shithole states trying to imprison women who had a miscarriage already?


The state was Ohio and the charges (which were dismissed by a grand jury) weren't because she miscarried, but because she tried to dispose of the corpse by flushing it down the toilet.  Even the state prosecutor disagreed with the original charges:

 

Quote

In a lengthy statement outlining the case and prosecution timeline, Dennis Watkins, the Trumbull County prosecutor, said that his office had found that Ms. Watts had not violated the law as claimed in the initial complaint and that it disagreed with a lower court’s application of the law after interviewing witnesses “and researching and applying the law.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, chakoo said:

I feel bad for the parents who had those embryos there for possible children (women have a set number of eggs) but this law is fucking gross and this should just be a damages suit against the hospital/ivf clinic.

 

This, 1000x this.

 

Again, if the states making these rulings or changing laws around reproductive health truly cared about children and not just reproductive control... they'd raise taxes to help fund child or parent welfare programs, not be opposed to slashing things like school lunch programs, promote sex education to reduce unwanted pregnancies, etc. But that never happens in these cases, because it's demonstrably NOT about "the children."

 

There's decades of ink spilled on this stuff. I've no doubt for some individuals, yes, it's about protecting "children" or "life." But that's absolutely not what shit like what inspired this thread is about, and there is is so much evidence to support that. There is no reason to provide a charitable interpretation to any of this. It is about reproductive control. Full stop.

  • Like 1
  • Halal 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...