Before answering the poll, please read other people views in the thread because the following story doesn't go into great details of what of the current situation and the implications.

Here is the short version of the story as I understood it for those who reading this and missed the current news.

A couple have a number of embryos frozen in storage.

They have now since split up.

He withdrew his consent for her to use them and want them destroyed.

The law clearly states, “it is a requirement that both parties consent to storage and use”.

She took the case to court.

Was it right to do so?

I am prejudiced as I answer, let me declare that now

A woman and her man went for IVF treatment, they created some tiny fertile embryos

They got fed up with the whole thing, fell out and then he decided it wasnt right for her to have the babies if he didnt want her to.

Fair goes for him

However she went for treatment because she was about to have her ovaries removed, because she had cancer, and this was her last chance.

Fair goes for her

Now he has decided she cant have a baby

Ever

Not ever, not one, not now, not at any time

Because the only baby or babies she could have had are already in the lab, she has since had all relevant body parts removed.

Now he didnt say she wasnt a fit mother because she was a drunk etc, he said he didnt want her to have a baby because he didnt want to pay for it.

Fair goes for him, again

But why wasnt there another option that she could have a baby and he need never see it or pay for it if he didnt want to but at least the hope that they had shared together need not now be literally destroyed becuase those embyrons already exist.

She wasnt asking him to make one, she was asking him to keep one

A very very sad situation and make no mistake.

But for me as a woman who wants a baby herself, I would support her right to have a baby she has already created as long as he didnt have to pay for it.

Fair?

I think so

Defrosting them and throwing them away when one of the parents wants them?

No, not fair


I know this is extremely controversial, but I have answered from the heart

It's not just a case of paying for the children though is it?

What about when those children turn 18 and decide they wanna know who their real father (biological) is.
Do they have a right to know?

Yes of course. But what about the man that didn't want to be a father? Or be a father to the children in the embryos? Everyone has a RIGHT to change their minds do they not?

She made the decision to have the embryos places in storage. Why not, at the same time have some Eggs stored too?

This mess would never have occured. She could have found a new partner and he could have given his sperm to have the eggs fertilised.

Never count on the partner your with now to be THE ONE forever. It's nice for hollywood, but nothing is 100% sure.

On the flip side.

What if was the man who wanted the embryos to be born and the mother rejected. Would he have been right to take it to court? Would he have had the right to the embryos being born?

Originally posted by DaBouncer
What if was the man who wanted the embryos to be born and the mother rejected. Would he have been right to take it to court? Would he have had the right to the embrios being born?

I did say it was controversial DB!

We can debate the moral rights and wrongs for ever but take the emotion away and we are left with a couple who have split up. In the normal course of events they would have had a family or not before they split. People do not have babies together after they have split up. Its tough for the women who cannot have children but that is life. Its tough. The trouble with life today is that people think they have a right to have everything. They dont. Its like IVF on the NHS. I do not think it should be a universal right. There are more important things to spend money on that can save lives. I digress. I am sorry. Rules should be tightened on the in vitro clinics.

I think it was right to take it to court. This is a very difficult situation and was possibly best dealt in a court room rather than slagging it out elsewhere.

I am split here. In general I do not think that embryos that are frozen should be unfrozen should the couple split up. Personally I don't think anyone should have them frozen if they have any intention of splitting up - but then we get into how irrelevant marrige vows are these days.

In this case all parties were aware that this was this womens last chance to have children. I can also understand the prospective fathers concern over responsibilities he would technically have to the child.

I think there should have been at least a financial clause whereby the women in question would clear him of any financial situation.

then we throw in a few years down the line "wheres my daddy mum?" and you have the emotional well being of the child to take into consideration.

There are ethical questions raised by the embryos being discarded - there are social questions raised over couples being dismissive over relationships. These two combined raise huge questions on how we take life for granted.

A very horrible situation to be in. I can sympathise as a women with this ladies desire to have children. It is perhaps best there was no children produced from this couple. For whatever reasons they split up there was quite obviously no desire on either part to keep the relationship going despite the fact they both knew of embryos they had created together being frozen and waiting.

ARgh

Moon