Couple Could Sue Over Discarded Embryo
I heard about this on the radio on the way to work today and looked it up when I got home. This is a very interesting development in the debate over stem cell research...at least indirectly.
It turns out that a couple in the Chicago area who had frozen embryos at a clinic have been given the option of suing because the embryos were accidentally discarded. The kicker is that, under Illinois state law, they can bring a wrongful death suit. Cook County Judge Jeffrey Lawrence said "a pre-embryo is a 'human being' ... whether or not it is implanted in its mother's womb."
If a human embryo is granted legal protection and status as a human being, which many of us already argue that very point, then it could have far-reaching implications into the destruction of embryos for research.
I will be following this story with interest on this blog and welcome any insight and feedback from readers.
It turns out that a couple in the Chicago area who had frozen embryos at a clinic have been given the option of suing because the embryos were accidentally discarded. The kicker is that, under Illinois state law, they can bring a wrongful death suit. Cook County Judge Jeffrey Lawrence said "a pre-embryo is a 'human being' ... whether or not it is implanted in its mother's womb."
If a human embryo is granted legal protection and status as a human being, which many of us already argue that very point, then it could have far-reaching implications into the destruction of embryos for research.
[The judge] said the couple is as entitled to seek compensation as any parents whose child has been killed.I, for one, think this is a great development. I completely support the President's stance on the subject as expressed in his recent State of the Union address: "I will work with Congress to ensure that human embryos are not created for experimentation or grown for body parts and that human life is never bought or sold as a commodity." This latest development is a step in the right direction in ensuring that one unborn human life is not snuffed out for any reason, especially when the "benefits" of such an action are so unclear (though I don't believe that even the best results justify the destruction of the human embyos).
In his ruling, Lawrence relied on the state's Wrongful Death Act, which allows lawsuits to be filed if unborn fetuses are killed in an accident or assault. "The state of gestation or development of a human being" does not preclude taking legal action, the act says.
Lawrence also cited an Illinois state law that says an "unborn child is a human being from the time of conception and is, therefore, a legal person."
I will be following this story with interest on this blog and welcome any insight and feedback from readers.
Labels: David C. Price
posted by DAVID C. PRICE at 2/05/2005 11:15:00 PM
|
6 Comments:
I saw this as well and posted it about it earlier today on prolifeblogs.com. Society has to face the truth that the embryo is a human, immature, but yet human. Valuing the life of an embryo less than that of an adult is inconsistent with the equality under God that we as Americans have striven for.
Hi again. thought i'd bother you with a few comments.
concerning this post, does that mean that it's OK and legal now to freeze our friends and family, since they're human beings, just like the embryos? I mean, if you *truly* apply all the same laws concerning right to life to embryos as you do to humans (not just the ones that conveniently support your political agenda), then it should be illegal to create an embryo and freeze it indefinitely.
i am a pro-life person, although i disagree with many about the role of legislation in curbing abortion. however, i still never understand why anti-stem cell and anti-abortion folk never get pissed off about leftover embryos created during the in vitro fertilization process. can anyone tell me what the difference is between creating embryos and freezing them for life and destroying an embryo?
so, if you're really gonna push for such legislation as you covered here, defining human life starting with an embryo, then all parents who pass through the in vitro fertilization process and end up creating embryos that aren't used (but are frozen) should at some point be charged with some sort of manslaughter/murder/wrongful death charge.
there's been so much talk on the right during this whole debate about not wanting to use life as a commodity. so i ask you this: isn't creating & freezing extra embryos in case the first implanted one doesn't work out, or the parents decide they want another kid down the road, just another equal form of commoditizing life, especially when that created life has a very large chance of being unused or discarded one way or another?
look forward to hearing your response, and knowing you're a new england fan, GO PATS!
You won't get an argument from me, my friend. If you've read some of my previous posts on the subject, you'll know I'm no fan of in vitro fertilization. There are certainly a lot of double-standards involved and I think this is one of them, but it is encouraging that there are still some ethical standards being upheld. As I put it, it is a step in the right direction...doesn't mean we're there yet.
WOw. what a story!
I should clarify one point in response to kidpositive. I do not think we should be charging parents who go through IVF with some sort of manslaughter. The society as a whole and the church, in particular, embraced this way too quickly, in my opinion, without thinking through the ethical implications thoroughly. As a result, there are a lot of people who adopt this procedure as a healthy and ethical practice to have children. Though I know of many who have done this, they have rarely been without complications and I still argue there are, as you pointed out, some ethical dilemmas. What I would hope for this development would be for the conversation to move into a thoughtful re-evaluation of those dilemmas in order for the general population to consider if this is something that couples should engage in. Thanks for insightful perspective.
i don't realistically don't think we should charge them either; it was more rhetoric. however, along those lines, such application of the law would only apply to those couples who didn't use all the embryos that were created during the in vitro process. i guess my whole point that i'd like to see addressed is: what is the difference between freezing an embryo forever (leaving it to die, essentially) and destroying one for science or otherwise (like the accident that happened at the fertility clinic)? if there really isn't a difference (which i don't see one), then why aren't anti-embryonic stem cell people not all up in arms about in vitro fertilization?
i think you and i probably have very close viewpoints on this.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home