Former South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley agreed with a recent Alabama Supreme Court ruling that characterized frozen embryos resulting from in vitro fertilization (IVF) as “babies.”
This ruling has caused apprehension among physicians and patients regarding the procedure’s future.
“Embryos, to me, are babies,” Haley told NBC News. “When you talk about an embryo, you are talking about, to me, that’s a life. And so I do see where that’s coming from when they talk about that.”
By legal definition, frozen embryos resulting from IVF are children and are therefore protected, according to the Alabama Supreme Court. The attribution of personhood may yield substantial consequences with regard to reproductive rights.
Read: Florida Gov. DeSantis Says Audit Of Disney’s Former Reedy Creek ‘Justified’ Concerns
“Well, I think the decision casts a shadow on a lot of options that usually are available through IVF,” Mary Ziegler, a legal historian and expert on reproduction and health care, told PBS.
“So, for example, if people have extra embryos, they can no longer be destroyed. They can no longer be donated for research in Alabama. It’s not even clear what the legality of storing them would be or if potentially they will need to be implanted.
“And then there’s just the simple fact, as we have seen with the University of Alabama in Birmingham, the threat that, if embryos are inadvertently damaged or destroyed, that could lead to lawsuits or even to criminal prosecutions, which I think is going to have a tremendous chilling effect on fertility care in the state,” said Ziegler.
The Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling, issued in a pair of wrongful death cases, determined that frozen embryos can be considered children under state law.
Read: Minnesota Man Charged With Assisting ISIS And Receiving Military-Type Training At ISIS Camp
The court cited anti-abortion language in the Alabama Constitution, stating that an 1872 state law allowing parents to sue over the death of a minor child applies to all unborn children, regardless of their location.
The ruling emphasizes that unborn children are considered children without exception based on their developmental stage or physical location.
While the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling is significant, it is not without its critics. Justice Greg Cook, in his dissenting opinion, argued that the 1872 law did not originally define “minor child” in a way that included frozen embryos. He suggested that the ruling stretches the law’s original intent and could potentially end the creation of frozen embryos through IVF in Alabama.
It is possible that the clinic and hospital defendants in the case may request a reconsideration of the court’s decision. The ruling could also lead to future legal challenges and debates over the interpretation of existing laws surrounding fertility treatments.
Read: Florida And Alabama Man Charged After “Rug Pull” From NFT: DOJ
The court’s decision has left patients and healthcare providers grappling with uncertainty. Patients who rely on IVF to overcome fertility issues are concerned about the potential disruption to their treatment plans. The ruling raises questions about the legality of freezing embryos and the fate of unused embryos.
Healthcare providers specializing in reproductive medicine may face challenges in delivering services due to the legal implications of the ruling. Some providers have already been instructed to pause IVF treatment, highlighting the immediate impact of the court’s decision.
In response to the ruling, advocacy groups and individuals are mobilizing to protect reproductive rights and access to fertility treatments.
Help support the Tampa Free Press by making any small donation by clicking here.
Android Users, Click To Download The Tampa Free Press App And Never Miss A Story. Follow Us On Facebook and Twitter. Sign up for our free newsletter.