This dilemma is about a modern family dispute—one that involves a pair of frozen female embryos, an unmarried couple who have separated, a signed contract, and an angry ex-boyfriend who is suing the woman for the right to unfreeze the two embryos and bring them to term

Subject:Health SciencePrice:2.84 Bought8

Share With

This dilemma is about a modern family dispute—one that involves a pair of frozen female embryos, an unmarried couple who have separated, a signed contract, and an angry ex-boyfriend who is suing the woman for the right to unfreeze the two embryos and bring them to term. The one-time couple created the embryos in an IVF clinic and had them frozen for later use. A contract had been signed with the stipulation that the embryos could only be brought to term if both partners agreed. However, the man argues that the contract is void because it did not specify what was to happen if they broke up. As a Catholic, it is his view that the embryos are his unborn children and he offers to take all the parenting responsibility and costs if the woman will let him have them. He insists that "We created these embryos for the purpose of life" and that they should not "sit in a freezer until the end of time." 

 

1)Is this a legal case about the validity of a contract? Is this a debate about when "personhood" starts? Is this about forcing his ex-girlfriend to have kids she does not want with a man she does not want to be with? Does it matter in your decision that the man can have other children?

2)Would you feel different if the woman wanted to bring the embryos to term but the man did not?