Well, it’s happened! I posted #275 which touched on these sorts of issues on Wednesday, Feb 21, and within hours the Alabama Supreme Court announced that it has ruled that, legally, an unimplanted embryo, frozen 2-6 days after being created in a laboratory for possible use in the In Vitro Fertilization process, is a CHILD in “God’s image,” and, therefore, subject to all of the legal protections available to any human being! Now my understanding is that it is standard practice in the IVF procedure that multiple embryos are created and those not selected for immediate implantation are either kept for possible future use, or may be destroyed, which, logically, would now constitute MURDER!
This decision, of course, if it doesn’t make IVF completely untenable, would, in all probability, require that the number of embryos created be reduced to the exact number to be implanted, and, thus, decrease the likelihood of a successful pregnancy. Some quick research shows that, according to the Mayo Clinic, the miscarriage rate of IVF pregnancies runs between 15 - 25%, increasing the possibility of “murder by miscarriage” if a successful pregnancy, leading to one (or more) births does not result. This failure rate suggests to me that having “extra” embryos available is a not unreasonable idea, although then there is the issue of what would become of the “extra” embryos..
Of course, it would make perfect sense for one to simply make the argument that, since “God doesn’t make mistakes!”, the whole idea of legal IVF is in defiance of God’s will, and if God wanted these people to have children, they would have them without the “interference” of so-called science. Thereby reinforcing the idea that All medical treatment is, actually, against the will of God.
I suppose that this would provide a way for the “anti-Obamacare” folks to justify accomplishing that end. After all, “What possible use is medical care that justifies the expense of public money?” I guess that perhaps we should follow Scrooge’s advice and accept the idea that people who are unwell had “… better die and decrease the surplus population.”
But, to return to IVF, given its history, what eventually happens to any unneeded embryos (some of which DO, currently exist) is, also, of some importance, since they are now defined as “children.” I would venture to guess that one COULD, reasonably, count them as “dependents” for tax purposes, thus allowing the (potentially childless) “parents” tax deductions to help compensate for the cost of maintaining the embryos indefinitely (which would seem to be required, as any “disposal” of these embryos is now murder), and they could also be used to gain access to various sources of child support funds, since they ARE, legally, “children.”
Of course, thinking ahead, there is the question of what happens when these frozen embryonic “children” reach the age of 19 years (the age of majority in Alabama)? Do they become “adults?” Exactly what does THAT mean and how do we deal with those issues? One also wonders how the existence of these “children” might affect inheritance rights and other legal issues even before they reach “maturity?” It seems unlikely that these embryonic “people” would ever be allowed to vote, or enjoy the other rights, and responsibilities, of citizenship, but the Court says that they ARE “people,” and, therefore, they must be citizens. And, mind you, I suspect that they would qualify as “natural-born,” (in spite of not actually having been born) so a case could be made that they could, if they got old enough, be allowed to hold elective office. Denying such rights would mean establishing a group of “second-class” citizens, who ARE BY LAW “citizens,” but are incapable of participating in that status.
I confess that I am reminded of the actions of the KKK during and after Reconstruction, in their attitude towards Negros. Of course the Alabama court’s ruling would apply to embryonic WHITE citizens, equally to those of other races. In fact, since I understand that IVF is fairly expensive, I would guess that it might apply to more “White” people, than Black ones. This reminds me of some of the worst aspects of the “Jim Crow” laws!
Way to go, Alabama! Once again, religious beliefs have been used to trump common sense, and the Founder’s ideas of reasonable, rational law. Good luck trying to deal with the problems you have created by trying to appease religious conservatives. I suspect you deserve what you’re going to get, and I suspect it’s going to be a mess. Given your willingness to try to make your religious beliefs into law (in contravention of the ideas of many of our Founders), you probably deserve it!
Welcome to the world you are making. I suspect that your God would NOT be happy, although it might get some more bigots and hypocrites elected.
🖖🏼 LLAP,
Dr. B
This decision, of course, if it doesn’t make IVF completely untenable, would, in all probability, require that the number of embryos created be reduced to the exact number to be implanted, and, thus, decrease the likelihood of a successful pregnancy. Some quick research shows that, according to the Mayo Clinic, the miscarriage rate of IVF pregnancies runs between 15 - 25%, increasing the possibility of “murder by miscarriage” if a successful pregnancy, leading to one (or more) births does not result. This failure rate suggests to me that having “extra” embryos available is a not unreasonable idea, although then there is the issue of what would become of the “extra” embryos..
Of course, it would make perfect sense for one to simply make the argument that, since “God doesn’t make mistakes!”, the whole idea of legal IVF is in defiance of God’s will, and if God wanted these people to have children, they would have them without the “interference” of so-called science. Thereby reinforcing the idea that All medical treatment is, actually, against the will of God.
I suppose that this would provide a way for the “anti-Obamacare” folks to justify accomplishing that end. After all, “What possible use is medical care that justifies the expense of public money?” I guess that perhaps we should follow Scrooge’s advice and accept the idea that people who are unwell had “… better die and decrease the surplus population.”
But, to return to IVF, given its history, what eventually happens to any unneeded embryos (some of which DO, currently exist) is, also, of some importance, since they are now defined as “children.” I would venture to guess that one COULD, reasonably, count them as “dependents” for tax purposes, thus allowing the (potentially childless) “parents” tax deductions to help compensate for the cost of maintaining the embryos indefinitely (which would seem to be required, as any “disposal” of these embryos is now murder), and they could also be used to gain access to various sources of child support funds, since they ARE, legally, “children.”
Of course, thinking ahead, there is the question of what happens when these frozen embryonic “children” reach the age of 19 years (the age of majority in Alabama)? Do they become “adults?” Exactly what does THAT mean and how do we deal with those issues? One also wonders how the existence of these “children” might affect inheritance rights and other legal issues even before they reach “maturity?” It seems unlikely that these embryonic “people” would ever be allowed to vote, or enjoy the other rights, and responsibilities, of citizenship, but the Court says that they ARE “people,” and, therefore, they must be citizens. And, mind you, I suspect that they would qualify as “natural-born,” (in spite of not actually having been born) so a case could be made that they could, if they got old enough, be allowed to hold elective office. Denying such rights would mean establishing a group of “second-class” citizens, who ARE BY LAW “citizens,” but are incapable of participating in that status.
I confess that I am reminded of the actions of the KKK during and after Reconstruction, in their attitude towards Negros. Of course the Alabama court’s ruling would apply to embryonic WHITE citizens, equally to those of other races. In fact, since I understand that IVF is fairly expensive, I would guess that it might apply to more “White” people, than Black ones. This reminds me of some of the worst aspects of the “Jim Crow” laws!
Way to go, Alabama! Once again, religious beliefs have been used to trump common sense, and the Founder’s ideas of reasonable, rational law. Good luck trying to deal with the problems you have created by trying to appease religious conservatives. I suspect you deserve what you’re going to get, and I suspect it’s going to be a mess. Given your willingness to try to make your religious beliefs into law (in contravention of the ideas of many of our Founders), you probably deserve it!
Welcome to the world you are making. I suspect that your God would NOT be happy, although it might get some more bigots and hypocrites elected.
🖖🏼 LLAP,
Dr. B
RSS Feed