I was not aware about the controversy about the rights of frozen embryos until I ran into this article. Divorce can land people into a variety of messes but this one is pretty unique:
That agreement specified that the embryos would be the joint property of the couple, so they would both need to consent to any future use of the embryos. It also covered what would happen if their relationship ended.
That fact that the embryo is considered anyone's property is morally wrong. How is this different than claiming one human being is the property of another?
"embryo disputes have become a battlefront for larger conflagrations over the moral status of embryos.”
That’s because “underlying most of the conflicts over disposition of embryos is whether one person’s right to procreate should prevail over another person’s right not to procreate,”
The fact of having needed to freeze and embryo is indicative of a stressful situation in the couple's life. Add to that now, the issue of having to figure out ahead of time the fate of this embryo should they fall out of love and part ways makes it significantly worse.
Comments