Misleading Alarm Over Alabama Supreme Court Embryo Ruling Hides Reality of Reproductive Technology
Less than one week after the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that embryos are children under the state’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, several fertility facilities brought their in vitro fertilization operations to a screeching halt. Republican and Democrat legislators also jumped to protect the largely unregulated assisted reproductive technology industry.
The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) announced Wednesday that it would suspend IVF until further notice to “evaluate the potential that our patients and our physicians could be prosecuted criminally or face punitive damages for following the standard of care for IVF treatments.”
UAB’s pause was quickly mimicked by Alabama Fertility Specialists (AFS), which decided to “hold new IVF treatments due to the legal risk to our clinic and our embryologists,” and The Center for Reproductive Medicine at Mobile Infirmary, the fertility facility at the center of the landmark case.
All blamed the state supreme court even though the justices did not attempt to nitpick or govern the operations of fertility facilities in its ruling. They were joined by corporate media and Democrats, which gladly amplified complaints about considering embryos humans.
Instead of exploring ways to regulate the unethical and immoral practices Big Fertility employs, lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle began working to immortalize the serial creation and destruction of human lives in their tiniest form in state and federal law. The National Republican Senatorial Committee even went so far as to claim this week that the very pro-life decision to consider embryos human life is merely “fodder for Democrats hoping to manipulate the abortion issue for electoral gain.”
Don’t Be Fooled
CBS Mornings aired the “anger” of Jasmine York, a 34-year-old mother whose March embryo transfer could be postponed due to UofA’s IVF pause. York agreed with the host that IVF is her “last hope to have a baby” due to her damaged fallopian tubes, but ended the segment by declaring the embryos she created with her husband are “not living children.”
“If they were, things would be a lot different in my world and all of these other women’s worlds,” York concluded. “We want living children. That’s our goal.”
Vice President Kamala Harris even complained that Alabamans are being “deprived of access to IVF.”
While it’s true that some Big Fertility customers aren’t getting what they paid for after, it wasn’t the Alabama Supreme Court that stopped them. The Alabama court’s controversial ruling never addressed how fertility facilities in the Cotton State should approach ART or creating embryos in labs. It certainly didn’t stop anyone from implanting already created embryos, as in York’s case.
Instead, the majority of justices simply held, in accordance with the state’s constitution and legal precedent, that embryos, which are scientifically deemed life at conception, are considered minors under the state’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act. The only reason Alabama babymaking specialists decided to halt IVF is because they knew they could suddenly be on the legal hook for negligence for willfully destroying viable embryos in the name of science and success.
Until now, fertility facilities’ “standard practice” for IVF required the serial manufacturing, “grading,” and destruction of hundreds of millions of embryos, some of which were likely viable, each year. At least two, AFS and UAB, offer unreliable genetic testing which not only pits frozen siblings against each other but can result in indefinite shelving, reduced chance of survival, or death of the embryos.
To inflate their patients’ chances of “successful pregnancy” and market IVF as a foolproof way to ensure parenthood, embryologists often encourage their customers to give dozens of harvested eggs for fertilization because more is linked to a higher rate of successful pregnancies. What’s not always considered or even properly discussed with clients is that leftover embryos must be disposed of or kept in expensive freezers along with one million other abandoned test tube babies.
Protecting Embryos Is Pro-Life
Knee-jerk reactions like those of the fertility facilities, corporate media, and even the Biden administration about the Alabama court’s decision are designed to provoke political outrage, similar to how pro-abortion doctors pretended to worry about treating ectopic pregnancies and miscarriages after the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson ruling. Both had nothing to do with Roe v. Wade or abortion and were not curbed in the 2022 decision or any state laws, but quickly became convenient talking points for pro-abortion activists to fearmonger about pro-life politicians and policies.
That being said, just because the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling is narrow doesn’t mean this decision shouldn’t inform future decisions about how fertility facilities use ART. There can and should be more reproductive technology regulation across the United States.
ART, as most fertility facilities apply it, does not support the idea that all life deserves a chance. IVF may yield tens of thousands of babies each year, but it also orders the death of hundreds of millions more. All “living children” start as embryos but, thanks to fertility facilities’ adoption of ART “standard practice,” most embryos do not continue to be living children.
The real “manipulation of the abortion issue,” of course, is pretending that life in its newest, most delicate form, doesn’t deserve legal protection. The ART baby-making and abortion baby-taking industries thrive on adults’ selfish desires to order and pay for the creation of a child without regard for that child’s right to life.
Being pro-baby and pro-life doesn’t mean giving Big Fertility, a multi-billion dollar industry, permission to do whatever they please because scientific advancements have made it possible. Being pro-baby and pro-life means giving every child, whose life inarguably begins at the moment of conception, the best chance of survival.
rnrn
What ethical considerations should be taken into account when navigating the field of assisted reproductive technology to uphold the dignity of human life
Mean it’s insignificant. The recognition of embryos as children under the state’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act is a significant step towards protecting the sanctity of life. It acknowledges the scientific fact that embryos are living human beings from the moment of conception and deserve legal protection.
The reaction from the fertility facilities and their supporters is concerning. Instead of accepting the court’s decision and working towards ethical and responsible practices, they have chosen to halt their operations and spread misinformation about the ruling. They claim that they could be prosecuted criminally or face punitive damages for following the standard of care for IVF treatments. However, the court’s ruling does not attempt to regulate or govern the operations of fertility facilities. It simply recognizes the legal status of embryos under the wrongful death law.
It is important to note that the reason fertility facilities have decided to halt IVF is because they could potentially be held accountable for the destruction of viable embryos. Until now, the standard practice in IVF has involved the creation, grading, and destruction of hundreds of millions of embryos each year. This practice, along with unreliable genetic testing and the use of excessive harvested eggs, has prioritized success rates over the well-being and dignity of these human beings. The court’s ruling challenges this unethical approach and calls for a more responsible and respectful treatment of embryos.
Protecting embryos and recognizing their human status is a pro-life stance. It affirms the value and worth of every human life, regardless of its stage of development. It encourages us to reconsider the practices of the assisted reproductive technology industry and find ways to ensure that the creation and disposition of embryos are done with respect and dignity.
Rather than sensationalizing the court’s ruling and using it as a political tool, we should focus on the larger ethical questions at hand. How can we responsibly navigate the complex field of assisted reproductive technology while upholding the dignity of human life? How can we promote alternatives such as adoption for the one million abandoned embryos currently in frozen orphanages?
The Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling is a reminder that the life and well-being of every human being, including embryos, deserve our protection and respect. It is an opportunity for us to have a thoughtful and informed conversation about the ethics of assisted reproductive technology and the value of every human life.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
