With more and more couples waiting until later in life to decide to have children, infertility and in vitro fertilization has become an increasingly popular way for a couple to conceive. There are thousands of embryos sitting in freezers right now and the debate over what should happen to any "leftovers" has been brewing for years. A new question that has arisen recently is what should happen to the frozen embryos when a couple decides to get a divorce? Who should be given custody of the embryos and are these embryos considered property or human life? While I won't quote myself on my opinion on this ethical question, I do see the validity in setting precedence with respect to whether a woman should be allowed to complete the in vitro fertilization process without the consent of her ex-husband. So far, the half-dozen state supreme courts that have handed down opinions about embryos in divorce cases have sided with a person's right not to be forced into parenthood. The way in which these cases have been decided sparks an interesting debate concerning paternal rights and a man's involvement in the decision to bring life into this world. While I don't believe that this debate will end anytime soon, I think its just a matter of time before the United States Supreme Court hears a case regarding property rights and frozen embryos.
The article this blog is based upon can be found at: http://www.news8austin.com/content/headlines/?ArID=178440&SecID=2