Alabama court ruled frozen embryos are children.

Discussion in 'Abortion' started by Bowerbird, Feb 21, 2024.

  1. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    61,077
    Likes Received:
    16,656
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are many decisions in human development that have not taken place at that time. You might want to call it a human, but it may die, it may be destined to not have a brain, and it may have other dread disease that will show up before birth. A fetus is very definitely NOT yet a person.

    And, you are still ignoring that the fetus may be incompatible with the life of the pregnant woman.

    Our constitution refers to persons and citizens - NOT fetuses.
     
    Bowerbird likes this.
  2. Bowerbird

    Bowerbird Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 13, 2009
    Messages:
    94,242
    Likes Received:
    75,296
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    A) not “babies” and b) protecting the life of a woman should be prime because how can she have more babies if she is dead?
     
    WillReadmore likes this.
  3. Izzy

    Izzy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2022
    Messages:
    11,371
    Likes Received:
    6,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    'Texas high court declines to decide if embryos are people or property'
    Source: Washington Post

    "The case that was before the state Supreme Court, stemming from a couple’s divorce, could have had significant implications for IVF in Texas.'

    By Molly Hennessy-Fiske
    June 14, 2024 at 2:14 p.m. EDT


    HOUSTON — The Texas Supreme Court on Friday declined to consider whether frozen embryos are people or property in the eyes of the law — a ruling that could have had dramatic consequences in a state where in vitro fertilization is booming. ... “I’m happy that IVF stays the way it is,” said Patrick Wright, the attorney for the prevailing party in the case, who was sued amid a divorce. Yet he cautioned that the issue is likely to resurface during next year’s legislative session. “This is just the start.”

    The case was brought by a Dallas-area woman after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022 and a Texas law making abortion a felony — punishable by up to life in prison — was “triggered” to take effect. That law, Caroline Antoun argues, requires her three frozen embryos to be treated as children in her divorce instead of property to be divided. ... “What’s at stake is my ability to protect my unborn children,” Antoun said in a recent interview, insisting that while antiabortion groups have supported her, she’s not against abortion but for personhood and parents’ rights. “The current law is failing us.”


    Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/06/14/ivf-texas-court-embryos-divorce/
     
    WillReadmore and Bowerbird like this.
  4. Izzy

    Izzy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2022
    Messages:
    11,371
    Likes Received:
    6,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    No paywall.

    'Texas Supreme Court rejects case that could have imperiled IVF access'
    ;The justices allowed a lower court’s opinion to stand, and, for now, sidestepped the question of whether a frozen embryo has the same rights as a living child.'
    snip:

    'The case centers on Gaby and Caroline Antoun, a Denton couple who divorced in 2022. They divided up their assets and settled on a custody agreement for their children. The major point of contention, however, was the frozen embryos the couple created while doing IVF in 2019.

    While doing IVF, the couple signed a contract saying that in case of divorce, the embryos would go to Gaby Antoun, the husband. At a hearing on June 29, 2022, a judge upheld that contract and awarded him the embryos.'

    cont
    https://www.texastribune.org/2024/06/14/texas-supreme-court-ivf/
     
    WillReadmore and Bowerbird like this.
  5. Izzy

    Izzy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2022
    Messages:
    11,371
    Likes Received:
    6,389
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Female
    snip:

    'Two months later, Texas’ near-total abortion ban went into effect, and Caroline Antoun asked the court for a new trial. She pointed to the abortion law, which defines an “unborn child” as “an individual living member of the homo sapiens species from fertilization until birth, including the entire embryonic and fetal stages of development.”

    “Because fertilization has occurred, the embryos are unborn children and thus people as Texas defines them,” her lawyers wrote in a brief. “They are unborn children and should be treated as having all the rights and constitutional protections of children.”

    The court disagreed, and Caroline Antoun appealed. The 2nd Court of Appeals in Fort Worth ruled that her arguments were “a classic example of taking a definition out of its legislatively created context and using it in a context that the legislature did not intend.”


    cont
    https://www.texastribune.org/2024/06/14/texas-supreme-court-ivf/
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2024
    WillReadmore and Bowerbird like this.

Share This Page