The experience of giving birth and raising a child is priceless, and thanks to advancements in assisted reproductive technologies, more couples facing infertility are now able to do so. According to a recent ruling by Alabama’s Supreme Court, couples can sue fertility companies for the “accidental destruction” of frozen embryos under the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act. Specifically, the court classified embryos as “unborn children.” In response, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed a bill offering fertility companies protection against couples who may sue. Currently, in vitro fertilization (IVF) services have resumed. However, the ambiguity of embryo rights remains. Fertility companies should be able to operate and provide couples with treatment to experience the birth of life free of restrictions from indeterminate laws.
IVF is a process that mimics conception. If the controlled fertilization involved is successful, then the fertilized egg will divide multiple times, creating a bunch of embryos. After choosing a viable embryo, the excess embryos are either frozen and stored for the couple to possibly use in the future, donated to medical research or given to another couple struggling with infertility. While it seems like a simple process, the emotional and physical toll that couples experience is substantial.
It’s important to note that the main controversy is the ambiguity regarding the treatment of embryos. When freezing and storing embryos or even shipping them to other clinics, mishaps are bound to occur, with embryos possibly being thawed if not kept at -321 degrees Fahrenheit. These are now legitimate reasons for couples to sue clinics when they represent common risks associated with the procedure. The potential of legal implications not only heightens the anxiety of staff members in IVF clinics but also of the couples going through the IVF process, regardless if the couple plans to sue or not.
Fortunately, Governor Ivey signed a bill offering legal protection for fertility companies. However, the vagueness regarding “accidental destruction” and “unborn children” remains a dark cloud above the world of infertility. This bill is a short-term solution, and the discussion regarding embryo rights will come up again without more specific legislation being implemented to protect it.
While the rain cloud of obscure laws follows IVF clinics, couples who have experienced success through the process have expressed sadness for couples who will be denied access to IVF procedures. An interview by the New York Times highlighted the voices of couples who have undergone IVF. Some couples have been undergoing the IVF process and, upon the court ruling, have been forced to wait for their clinic to resume operation. The shipment of embryos across state borders was also put on pause. One couple told the Times, “I love that many in our legislature are people of faith who agree with my thoughts and beliefs … but this isn’t a place for the government to be involved.”
Looking through a broader lens, embryo rights are ambiguous nationwide. Currently, there is no federal legislation regarding the rights of embryos in the U.S. Each state has a separate framework, leading to uncertainty for couples who live on the border between the two states. Additionally, clinics may be less common in states with more prominent laws on embryo rights. In contrast, states with fewer laws on embryo rights might have more reasonable access to fertility clinics. There must be a balanced way to approach infertility issues and allow fertility doctors and clinics to operate freely.
A national framework and more specific legislation regarding embryo rights is essential to continue the conversation about what fertility treatment really means for the country. Alabama’s court has created an environment where many lives are being put on pause by bringing immense confusion to Alabama’s citizens and violating the reproductive rights of women. Lawmakers and those in government should make it a priority to create specific laws that make embryo rights clear across the country.
