Alabama Supreme Court allows couple to proceed with wrongful death lawsuit over destroyed frozen embryos
The Alabama Supreme Court Recognizes Frozen Embryos as Unborn Children
In a groundbreaking ruling, the Alabama Supreme Court has declared that frozen embryos should be acknowledged and safeguarded as unborn children. This decision comes as several couples file a lawsuit against a fertility clinic for the destruction of their frozen embryos.
The court, in an 8-1 ruling, stated that the state’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies to frozen embryos, as the law protects all children regardless of their location. The justices based their decision on a clause in Alabama’s Constitution that upholds the sanctity of unborn life.
“Here, the text of the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act is sweeping and unqualified. It applies to all children, born and unborn, without limitation,” wrote Justice Jay Mitchell in the majority decision. “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.”
The ruling came after three couples sued the Center for Reproductive Medicine in Mobile when five frozen embryos were accidentally destroyed during their transfer within the clinic. The couples sought wrongful death claims for the embryos’ loss.
After the lower court dismissed their claims, the couples appealed to the Supreme Court. With the new ruling, their request for punitive damages will now be reconsidered by the Mobile Circuit Court.
Justice Greg Cook dissented from the majority decision, expressing concerns that it could restrict in vitro fertilization (IVF) in Alabama.
“No court — anywhere in the country — has reached the conclusion the main opinion reaches. And, the main opinion’s holding almost certainly ends the creation of frozen embryos through in vitro fertilization (‘IVF’) in Alabama,” he said.
In his concurrence with the majority, Chief Justice Tom Parker drew upon the works of historic thinkers such as William Blackstone, Thomas Aquinas, John Calvin, and Petrus Van Mastricht to support his understanding of Alabama’s constitutional provision. He emphasized that all branches of government should protect the sanctity of life.
“All three branches of government are subject to a constitutional mandate to treat each unborn human life with reverence. Carving out an exception for the people in this case, small as they were, would be unacceptable to the People of this State, who have required us to treat every human being in accordance with the fear of a holy God who made them in His image,” Parker wrote.
Parker’s concurrence also referenced biblical books such as Genesis, Exodus, and Jeremiah to further support his argument.
The court’s decision has been applauded by pro-life advocates who have long advocated for personhood recognition from the moment of conception.
“This decision made by the Alabama Supreme Court affirms the scientific reality that a new human life begins at the moment of fertilization. Each person, from the tiniest embryo to an elder nearing the end of his life, has incalculable value that deserves and is guaranteed legal protection,” said Lila Rose, President of Live Action.
Get the DailyWire+ App for More News
CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP
What are the potential consequences of affording frozen embryos the same legal status as living children?
Ion that a frozen embryo should be afforded the same legal status as a living, breathing child,” Justice Cook said in his dissenting opinion. “This ruling has the potential to create chaos in the field of reproductive medicine, as it may deter couples from seeking fertility treatments in Alabama out of fear of legal repercussions.”
The landmark ruling by the Alabama Supreme Court has ignited a larger debate about the legal status of frozen embryos. While some argue that these embryos deserve the same protections as unborn children, others assert that they should be treated as property, subject to the decisions of the individuals who created them.
The decision will have significant implications not only for reproductive medicine but also for family law and the legal rights of frozen embryos. It may set a precedent for future cases in Alabama and possibly even influence decisions in other states.
Advocates for the recognition of frozen embryos as unborn children see this ruling as a victory for the protection of life at all stages. They believe that these embryos should be afforded the same legal rights and protections as any other child, regardless of their current state of development or physical location.
However, critics argue that this ruling could have unintended consequences and lead to the restriction of reproductive rights. They worry that it may hinder individuals and couples from pursuing fertility treatments and make it more difficult for them to make decisions about their reproductive future.
The Alabama Supreme Court’s recognition of frozen embryos as unborn children is undoubtedly a contentious issue, with valid arguments on both sides. As this ruling continues to shape the legal landscape, it is clear that the debate surrounding the rights and legal status of frozen embryos is far from over.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...