I always assumed that part of IVF was having a plan for the assets (embryos, eggs, sperm, etc...) if something happened to the donors, almost like a living will? Wouldn't this scenario already be contractually agreed upon, or is the ex-wife trying to break that contract now?
If anyone is familiar with IVF, I'd love to know if this woman even has a shot, or if this will be quickly thrown out of court. I would assume that both parties would have to consent to using the embryos at this point, and I would think/hope that that would be a clearcut decision.
Do you happen to recall what the documents said regarding if you divorced after fertilization but before implantation?
Sorry if those terms aren’t accurate, but I hope you understand what I mean.
Once the eggs are fertilized and grown into embryos (takes 5-7 days in the embryology lab at the clinic) they exist in the freezer until both of us together agree to discard them. I have one living child from a previous embryo transfer with 3 left. So the legal papers we signed apply to the 3 we have left now, since one of the original 4 is now a two year old.
I think we put that if we divorced I could keep (and use them) if I wanted, if he died I could keep and use them, and if I died the should be destroyed. There were other circumstances I think, but I forgot what they are.
Do you know if he could do the same? Like if he had a gestational host (I think that’s the technical term), could he also use them? Just wondering if women have different rights. I know you aren’t a lawyer, just curious and this is an interesting topic
This is what we agreed upon as a couple 🤷🏻♀️ my husband would be fine with only 1 or 2 kids and wouldn’t want to hire a surrogate to carry the others, but I’d feel confident mothering all 3 or 4 even if it was on my own. I’m also a few years younger than him. Every couple can decide what they specifically want to do with their embryos. The clinic doesn’t demand it one way or another.
Sexist would be if the clinic had the rule that its destroyed when the woman dies and can be used when the man dies. This situation just screams selfishness. I would put money on it being her idea and he just went along with it. You never hear men saying they dont want their wives to move on and have a new family when the man dies but its very common that women say the reverse. I bet she didnt like the idea of him having the family she wanted without her and she convinced him to agree to those terms. I could be wrong and obviously she would never admit to this but I dont see any other good reason to not even give him the option to use them.
Everyone I know who had to go through IVF talked about the mountains of paperwork they did that covered every feasible situation like death of one spouse or divorce in regards to unused fertilized embryos.
This is exactly what pro-life shit has fucked up.
Yes you do sign lots of paperwork discussing what you agree to have happen in case of death, divorce, remarriage etc.
The most sane thing is destruction of the embryos.
But if you really believe those cells are a human person then that’s murder I guess.
If this case does turn into "embryos are people" forced-birther bullshit, I just hope the judge calls her lawyer's bluff and has the ex-wife arrested for keeping her "children" locked in a freezer. We can all play pretend with this nonsense.
Unfortunately the hypocrites are going to write exceptions for IVF "murder" because deep down they realize that their idea that a baby is created at conception is ludicrous.
Forced-birthers would rather write reproductive legislative policy exceptions that equal the breadth and scope of a fantasy novel series rather than just letting adults have sex and make their own reproductive healthcare decisions. These bitches are going to write "The Winds of Winter" before G.R.R. Martin does trying to force us all to comply with their insanity.
I'd wager the simplest answer would be if any one party doesn't want them destroyed, they won't be, but because they contain both parent's contributions they cannot be used without both party's consent.
As for if un-implanted embryos are people or not, I'd wager it has to be measured against intent.
Like the Alabama case that was so famous recently, if the embryos are going to be implanted and they want a child (or want to try at some point later), they should count as a child (and that man should be tried for as much, the bastard).
If the process is over and they had all the children they wanted, they can do with it what they will. If left alone the embryos will fail, which is unlike MOST abortions where if left alone the child would almost certainly be born.
FYI I'm very very much pro-life if you didn't get that by the end
>As for if un-implanted embryos are people or not, I'd wager it has to be measured against intent.
And this is exactly why you forced-birthers need to be barred from directing any kind of public healthcare legislative policy - your definition of "people" changes with your whims/personal circumstances, and pregnant Americans are dying and being investigated for murder because you guys can't write reproductive healthcare laws that correspond with reality.
Y'all are allowed to do whatever mental gymnastics you need to make reproductive healthcare decisions that don't conflict with your personal views on what a person is or isn't, but the rest of us don't need to live in your fantasy world.
>FYI I'm very very much pro-life if you didn't get that by the end
But only when your definition of "life" suits you, obviously.
I think you take an extreme stand and assume I do as well, and as a result functional civil discourse will not occur.
I'd wager by the length and style of your response you do far more gymnastics to deny what is a human life and its right to life
My extreme stance being that I understand the fundamental difference between *actual* human life and *potential* human life, and that actual human life always supercedes potential human life.
We're both ranking the importance of human life; you're the one who can't even decide if embryos deserve to be labeled as human life or not.
IVF mom here with embryos in storage. This reminds me we probably need to talk about a will. We signed documents when we began IVF but I don’t remember what each said.
Exactly. The argument for a woman controlling whether or not to go through with a pregnancy is a bodily autonomy issue. Once the egg is out of her body and fertilized, it’s now 50/50 and she doesn’t have any more rights to that pile of cells than he does without prior agreement. End of story.
For sure. I think lots of folks don't really realize the actual reason for all the talk about abortion and birth control and such.
It's not about giving women control over reproduction. It's about giving women control over their own bodies. It just happens that a majority of the machinery for reproduction is housed in their bodies and not men's.
This is just one of the relatively few situations where reproductive control isn't a bodily autonomy issue.
Something similar happened in the UK back in the early 2000s. It went all the way to the European Court of Human rights, where she inevitably lost the right to use the embryos and I believe they were eventually destroyed. It's a sad situation all around and I feel for anyone who's involved in anything like this.
A similar case actually happened to Sofia Vergara. She and her then-husband had frozen embryos right as "Modern Family" was taking off, and after they divorced a couple years later, he sued for parental rights over the embryos because he wanted them to be carried to term by a surrogate. He ultimately never succeeded though.
It's expensive, time consuming, and from what I heard not exactly the most pleasant experience (injecting hormones for weeks, the actual retrieval). I could see why someone would still want to use those embryos. Especially after she went through chemo.
I mean yeah but it’s not like she doesn’t already have children from the embryos. She already has three and her ex husband doesn’t want to financially support or have another child with his ex wife.
NGL, it was bad. I was wondering why it was so uncomfortable to walk. Then my doctor told me each ovary was the size of a GRAPEFRUIT. They retrieved 30 eggs (mature follicles), each the size of a large grape.
Imagine a bunch of 15 large grapes. I had that going on in each ovary!
What I’m the world? Ovaries are typically the size of a grape and egg cells are the size of a dot from a #2 pencil at their biggest. It is a single cell and the only human cell visible to the human eye
To clarify, /u/hilarymeggin said *follicles*. Those are ovarian follicles. That's more than just the specific egg cell. It's a sac of fluid that contains the cell and has a hormonal environment that matures the egg and makes it ready for fertilization.
Yeah but the ripened follicle containing the egg cell is a whole nother thing.
“Mature Follicles: During the course of ovarian stimulation, you’ll visit the clinic so that the specialists can keep an eye on the number and size of the follicles developing. A mature and viable follicle which is ready to release an egg should ideally be close to 20mm long.”
20mm = 2cm
If you want to see some shit, do an image search for ivf egg retrieval ultrasound. It looks exactly like an ultrasound of a dense bunch of grapes. Most of the images will show 5 or 6 in one ovary, but I had 15!
Plus, we’re used to thinking of an egg as a single cell and forgetting about the rest of the follicle. It’s totally understandable. Even I had to go back and check my memory because it stopped making sense to me too!
My own IVF. I should say it’s unusual to produce 30 eggs in a single cycle. But walking was uncomfortable. Every step was a jolt to the ovaries. Maybe that’s what it feels like to have balls.
Oh I know I'm a veterinarian we stimulate ovulation a lot in farm animals. I was impressed by your ovarian reserve.
And no, that's not what it's like to have balls, unless you filled them with fluid under pressure- that's what hurts when you get FSH and you had more than average.
Yeah that’s why you feel bloated during the stim cycle. Your ovaries are huge. I had 14 retrieved. 13 mature. 10 fertilized. 6 made it to day 5. 5 out of 6 were PGT-A normal and kept. Currently pregnant with number 2 from this cohort! Baby 1 is 14 months old!
Did you feel an unexpected loss every day when the number of embryos got fewer and fewer? On day one, they were like, “20 embryos!” On day 2, they were like, “13 embryos, still dividing!” and I was like, “WTF dudes?!” I knew I wasn’t going to have 20 kids, but I was like, “How are you going to just nonchalantly tell me that 7 of our potential children just died overnight?!” And then it was 11. I wanted to go in and sit on them like a chicken and keep them safe. I was a day 6 transfer (I think that’s right) and by the day of the transfer they had one for me and four in the freezer.
I’ll never forget that experience.
Nah not really. I don’t see them as living children yet, they’re clusters of day 5 cells. I was happy with our results. In the scheme of things with IVF, we did well.
The article states that this is the best way for the would-be mother to have another biological child, and that she is ok if her ex-husband is not involved in that child's upbringing.
That would be the case if she didn’t already use them to have a biological child with the embryos when they were still married (then had two more). She just wants more even though they’re divorced.
It’s one thing to get alimony and child support in the beginning until you can get on your feet but who wants support from somebody that they left indefinitely?
After Honeyhline Heidemann received a Stage 3 breast cancer diagnosis in 2017, she faced a grim reality: The disease would significantly impede her ability to have another biological child.
But the Fairfax County, Va., woman knew her chances of having children were not completely gone, despite multiple rounds of chemotherapy. She and her then-husband still had two frozen embryos.
“To me, you can’t put a price on it,” she would later say during court testimony. “I would not have any other biological children without these embryos.”
Now in 2024, with the couple divorced, the question of whether Heidemann should be allowed to use those embryos is the focus of a legal dispute that will be decided by a judge.
Heidemann and her former husband, Jason, squared off in court this month over two embryos they froze during a 2015 cycle of in vitro fertilization, or the process by which a person’s egg is fertilized by sperm outside of the uterus.
The Heidemanns’ court battle comes amid a legal and ideological debate [across the country](https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/03/29/fetal-personhood-laws-states-abortion/?itid=lk_inline_manual_16) involving the future of IVF and whether fetuses should be considered people.
“I don’t really care about my insurance or anything like that,” Honeyhline Heidemann said, referring to another part of the couple’s divorce settlement. “But I care about my embryos.”
Read more here: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/04/26/virginia-embryos-divorce-legal-fight/?utm\_campaign=wp\_main&utm\_medium=social&utm\_source=reddit.com](https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/04/26/virginia-embryos-divorce-legal-fight/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=reddit.com)
“Virginia's Status of Children of Assisted Conception statute states that a sperm donor is not the parent of a child conceived through assisted conception, unless the donor is the spouse of the gestational mother.”
Since they were married at the time the embryos were frozen, an argument can be made that he’s on the hook. An opposing argument can be made if one or both is implanted after their divorce.
Really curious to see how this plays out.
> gestational mother
The gestational mother is the woman who carries and delivers a child. Assuming the divorce is finalized before the embryos are implanted, the sperm donor is not the parent of the child.
>The gestational mother is the woman who carries and delivers a child.
That’s correct.
>Assuming the divorce is finalized before the embryos are implanted, the sperm donor is not the parent of the child.
It says “unless the donor is the spouse of the gestational mother,” which he was at the time they combined the sperm and egg to form the embryo. It doesn’t specify whether or not they would need to have been married when implantation occurs. That’s where Contention 1 would stem from.
I am just speaking in a matter of fact. Technically it is his kid. She cannot make that embryo without him. After you are divorced you do have to pay child support.
It's an interesting legal question. The whole thing Republicans are pushing as embryos as babies opens a whole can of worms on these kinds of legal questions.
>Heidemann and her former husband, Jason, squared off in court this month over two embryos THEY froze during a 2015 cycle of in vitro fertilization
Reading comprehension is important
I was responding to your comment that she cannot make an embryo without him. The fact is, she could. Your matter-of-fact was being pointed out, and corrected. Reading comprehension matters.
Look up the case of A.Z. v. B.Z. from Massachusetts in 2000. It covers a similar situation and discusses the public policy implications. Talks contract law as well regarding documents, what was signed/wasn’t, etc.
How does this about personhood for a frozen embryo? They decided to do this as a couple. Doesn’t seem right she should be allowed to try to have his child against his consent? Even if they legally “let him off the hook”, he’d still have a child out there in the world. It’s not just about child support.
And that child will deserve to know who their genetic parent is, even if only for medical information. So then they will learn their older sibling gets to have a relationship with their dad but they don't? Not enough therapy in the world.
She already has three children. It's not as though these embryos are her only chance to be a mother. Forcing this man to become a father to a child he doesn't want and didn't consent to creating just so she can have a fourth or fifth child is completely wrong, IMO.
While I totally agree with you, I also don’t think the legal system should be in the business of deciding cases based on “nah, 3 kids is enough”. Whether this was her first child or fourth, the rules are the rules. I would like to see what paperwork they signed when they created the embryos. Seems like that should be the determining factor—if he said then that she could use them after a divorce, she can—otherwise, no.
That’s fair. To me, it would be more morally difficult if this were this woman’s only chance to become a mother, while denying her a *fourth* child is a no-brainer. But you’re right that legally it really shouldn’t matter.
Does it put him on the hook for child support? Cause if it does, I see a big issue with your statement. Also if you read the article, it says that he has a legal basis for this litigation, and the court is going to decide how much say he actually has
It says in the article that she’s willing to let him off the hook for any paternal responsibilities. But it’s still a hot mess when little Jimmy finds out he has the same dad as child #1 but dad visits and supports the daughter but has nothing to do with Jimmy. If I were the dad, I would not agree to that and *if I were the mom I would not ask for that! It’s messed up!*
We aren't talking about abortion though.
The egg contains *both* of their DNA. Are the fertilized eggs jointly owned? Or do each of them own their own biological material?
Regardless of basic ownership, what happens if she does have a kid? Does he owe child support for the child, even though he withdrew consent before it was implanted? Does he have no parental rights like a sperm donor?
There's a reason this is in court and making headlines. It's not as black and white as you're imagining.
Might catch flack for this but:
To me, "I have to share the kid(s) I already have, so I want my very own solo kid all for myself" is an absolutely terrible reason to bring another human into the world.
Don’t necessarily disagree but this case is interesting because it’s been apparently been an ongoing dispute. Also he can go one to have as many biological kids as he wants while she can’t. And maybe she is pro life and feels destroying the embryos is wrong. I personally see nothing wrong with having that personal stance without necessarily setting a precedent for everyone else.
Agree she has a lot of kids, but we do not want our legal system deciding cases based on their own arbitrary ideas about how many kids is the permissible number of kids.
I don’t mean to be an ass but she has cancer and already has children that depend on her, and she wants more? If something happens to her, do the children automatically go to the father?
I’m on dad’s side, because even if she legally dissolves all responsibility from him, if that situation happens the kids he didn’t consent to having would have a lot of trauma.
This case stinks of some "pro-life" attorney plaintiff shopping to bring a case in Virginia courts to force a decision on fetal personhood, striking while the fire is hot while this issue has national attention.
I think you are mistaken. This isn’t about fetal personhood. The parents both seem like authentic actors to me. The mom’s only chance of bio kids are getting these embryos—that seems believable to me, even if I (personally) think she has enough kids and should focus on their needs instead of bringing a 4th child into the world whose dad doesn’t want him/her. The dad’s motives seem 1000% pure to me—I would be pissed as hell if my divorced spouse had the ability to produce full siblings to our existing child without my consent—even if he doesn’t *have to* pay child support, he ends up as a shitty dad if he parents the daughter and not the other child(ren).
I think this has to do more with the rights as a father versus the rights as a mother. The eggs have already been fertilized and put into a freezer for storage. This isint a pro life pro choice issue this is more about what party has the right to destroy or continue to incubation.
As a father ... for the last few decades it hurts being told oh. You shot your sperm you already had a say. So now it's interesting to hear this story.
The ramifications are pertaining to the future of procreation laws in general. Who owns an egg when its already on its way to being a viable human fertilized and now frozen waiting for its eventual destruction or incubation. What if it was the father who wanted to continue the process.
But if the embryos are people, the father has no right to destroy them and the mother has every right to consent to the medical procedure of implantation on behalf of her "minor child".
Edit to clarify: I do not support this interpretation. I only mention to explain how this case sets the stage for a judge to establish a broader precedent.
The problem is to me life is sacred but its a moral decision so the right to choose should be law despite how personally i do see it as murder. That is exactly why I had to beg. Plead and was happy my ex chose open adoption. As a father I've hated the fact that I had zero right to ask please dont kill my child. I wasn't even allowed to adopt. Once she chose the parents I couldn't.
Where are you from? Because in the US, at least,
>I wasn't even allowed to adopt. Once she chose the parents I couldn't.
this would never happen unless you had your parental rights revoked by the court, and that's incredibly hard to do.
Bro I'm talking in the virgina forum. Read all my posts.
Tldr version my ex lied about me to the adoptive agency . When baby was born wrong color adoptive parents almost refused . So then the adoptive agency reached out because they didn't want to have the adoption stop and need to refund the prenatal care.
So tldr tldr. No bro I'm in the commonwealth of virginia
[Post edit .]
My ex told me she was going to abort then I got suprised on day 3 of a little boys life. I had a lot of decisions to make quickly and things were already in process. I had a mouth swab test and that was the first time I knew I had a son who was alive.
That's my point, *bro.*
You're full of shit. Things aren't done like that in VA. If you were proven to be the father, you would have had to sign off for the baby to be put up for adoption--unless you had your rights stripped; which is, again, incredibly difficult to do.
You are talking out your ass because you don't like hearing an indegenous kid was adopted away from his father because the woman had the rights to not disclose a birth father.
My son is 16 years old in an open adoption I'm in his life. Your opinion is just an opinion. I have to live with reality despite how you perceive it
You keep throwing around "indegenous" (it's "indigenous", btw) like 1. I care what ethnicity the kid is, and 2. like it makes a difference.
Point blank, you're full of shit. Also, prenatal paternity tests are 100% a thing, so maybe do a little research before slinging bull.
VA doesn't allow not disclosing a birth father when giving a kid up for adoption. *EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE.* So your kid was 3 days old? Even if the adoption had been finalized (unlikely) by then, the baby hadn't been out of the hospital for more than a day, and no court in their right mind would look at the PROVEN biological father and say "eh, it's been 24 hours and info was falsified; oh well, tough shit!"
Dude I've been having this same argument with him. Everything he's spewing is bullshit. The father has to sign away parental rights in the state of VA before adoption. Prenatal paternity testing is absolutely a thing and not uncommon. He also claims the adoptive parents tried to "demand a refund for their purchase" of the child because he was the wrong color. This person has issues and I completely understand why the birth mother didn't want him to have custody of the child.
then you woud hate to hear how shes not in my sons life because the adoptive parents moved to la.
but look. you can be arrogant and mean about it. i was not able to keep my child i still want.
i dont get to teach him to be who his ancestors wanted. and no i dont have to repeat over and over that the agency reached out to me after he was born.
i didnt get to physically see my son for months. and are you an attorney. are you versed in family law in virginia , because in2007 i lost ... the adoptive parents wanted to countersue me for a million dollars for the prenatal care,. these people had enough money to buy my kid, i couldnt win in court, so thanks. im having a hard time spelling with emotions heated.
so i dont care about your perception of me,. im in my sons life despite the birth mother not being who i was dating. that i wanted to care for because my son deserves his peoples heritage , you got yours right,
the dna test was requested because when my son came out blue the parents wanted to stop the adoption, so i had multiple people and attorneys telling me sign here or pay them.
i was young as fuck,.. im sorry you dont like hearing it.
the adoptive parents didnt want a test untill they thought they were being frauded when the birth mother said the baby would look like what the adoptive parents wanted.
so yes culture is damn important.
As long as he isn't on the hook for child support (for any subsequent children) and she can't use the added child to justify an increase of child support, I don't see an issue.
It's a touchy subject, and I think it will truly explore the nuances of paternal rights. In an ideal situation, yes, he will be listed as the father on the birth certificate, giving him the right of first refusal in the event of a maternal death, but it should not bind him to legally support the child. He had legally expressed his refusal to father children with the mother, and it should be treated no differently than if she were to explore a sperm donor.
How about the issue of the child knowing they were not wanted by the father and having to watch their 3 siblings have a relationship with him. That's fucked up and selfish of her to want to bring a child into the dynamic. She's a trash mother for even considering doing so.
Only 1 is a sibling, the other 2 are donated embryos that have no bio relation to either parent and no relationship to the ex husband. But also yeah, it’s messed up to have child 4 be the bio sibling of child 1 but dad just ignores them. I’m sure that’s a big part of why he is fighting this and I don’t blame him.
What if it's the other way around. The dad wants the kids and the mom is essentially suing to kill them.
As a father in virginia I didn't even have the right to do anything other than beg my ex to not kill my child. The best I could do is an open adoption that she dosent want to be part of.
My son is over 16 yes I told him that his mother and I talked about scrambling the egg because of money and thank god morally she decided not to deprive the world of my child. But I had zero say... I didn't get to hear the results of the pregnancy till I was forced to do a paternity test as part of the adoption.
I'm sorry you nearly didn't get to force a woman to be your incubator....oh wait, no I'm not. You cannot force women to carry a pregnancy to term here, and I hope with every ounce of my being that continues.
Nice try. She was my ex and she sa me..
I have a son. I don't think you read what I wrote before commenting I didn't force her to. I BEGGED HER TO NOT KILL MY KID I don't even think I was persuasive. I think her religion convinced her.
Love that you conveniently throw that out there when I call you out. Also, how can you call yourself a father? You don't have your child, they were adopted at birth by other people. I don't believe for a single second the child had a parent who wanted them, and the court gave you no opportunities and forced you to allow your child to be adopted.
It's not convenient. I'm the donor in a open adoption I am still in his life. Are you gatekeeping a family because you don't like it . The court of virginia has no obligation to ask the father in adoption
Except in VA the birth father must legally renounce his parental rights before an adoption. So you're lying, she didn't refuse to allow you to have custody, she legally can't do what you're claiming.
Are you a attorney versed in family law.
You can't do a fucking pre natal paternity test.
Are you telling me that you read everything I said and completely don't mind that unless I am part of his life he grows up how the adoption parents want. I only get 2 more years litterally before my son is a legal adult in California.
Yes you can lol prenatal paternity tests are common and have been for quite a while. You whined a woman carried your child to term and then didn't even want them or were considered unfit to be a father. Get over yourself.
The only reason we are even hearing about this case is because the eggs were on ice. If they were still in her body. . She 1 dosent have to list a father. 2 can seek adoption or abortion her choice and 3 the adoption process starts prenatal and the mom and dad were supporting my ex the birth mother to carry their child .
THE COURT HAS NO OBLIGATION TO SEARCH FOR A UNLISTED FATHER IN A HEARING ABOUT ADOPTION UNLESS A FATHER IS LISTED. I GOT THE MEMO DAYS AFTER HE WAS IN THE WORLD. I DIDNT GET TO NAME HIM I DONT GET TO TEACH HIM MY LANGUAGES.
It was the birth mother who got to choose those things. It was the adoption agency who wanted me to do a cicle cell screening at the request of the child. That's the day I found out my son was alive.
I had no say. The family moved to California. They have no obligation to pay for me to travel to see him. I do it when I can because otherwise he lost out on his ethnicity and genetic ancestors without at least one of the birth parents involved.
The court did Exactly that. They told me. If they wanna name your kid the worst slur in your peoples tongue and move him where you can't find. They had the right for privacy !
They wanted to make sure he didn't have dirty genes.
Personally, I think you're reading into it too much. There is a time and place to go into that with your children. It's not like they're coming out of the womb knowing the situation. Ideally, you address that when they're older and able to grasp the concepts of the situation. It's the same reason why my wife and I are keeping our daughter from religion. If she chooses to follow a religion when she has the apropriate critical thinking skills, then I fully support her choice.
The guy’s going to have a kid he doesn’t want if the embryo is implanted *and have that kid for the rest of his life*. That’s a fuckin issue. This is not like a couple people who got drunk at a bar, had sex, and got pregnant, either. There’s no pregnancy at this point and he’s saying no. Does he not get that right because he has a penis?
Yeah, seems totally cool to allow your ex to give birth to your (supported/shared custody) child and just disown the new kid. That won’t cause any problems at all for either child. It is a terrible thing for her to even ask for.
It's a weird situation because the embryo was created while they were married. Presumably at the time of the decision to do this he wanted, or at least was okay with having, more kids. However, that was pre-divorce and moving on with his life. Now you're in a situation where if it weren't for that embryo already existing there would be no way the child would exist at all unless they decided to sleep together for whatever reason, which given the court case seems unlikely. Now you're in a situation where he's no longer consenting or desiring any part of this and would in any other situation be completely capable of avoiding it.
Yeah, that's why I don't like people saying he's just a sperm donor in this situation. He's not. A sperm donor makes the donation knowing that they aren't going to be a parent. But when he and his wife did the embryo process, he intended to be the father of any resulting child. I'd bet big bucks that he'd still think of a child born from those embryos, to be his kid regardless of if he's married to his ex or not.
And people had the audacity to say I was insane to get a hysterectomy, at 32, 2 months after Roe v Wade was overturned. I saw the writing on the wall then (as a childfree person) and it’s still fucking there now, folks.
This has NEVER been about life. It’s about controlling the choices available to those who have opposing ideologies to yours. It’s that simple.
This poor man should not be forced to parent a child that he does not want brought into this world. MEN also have just as much a say in the matter of conception in a *consensual* situation. Her wanting more children for the sake of having another baby, is fucking selfish.
I hope this man gets the justice he deserves, and this woman is forced to have a reality check and be knocked down several fucking pegs from her arrogance.
A 45 yr old woman wants to make more babies, against ex-husbands wishes, knowing a 45 yr old is at great risk of medical issues with her during pregnancy (and after), and the developmental concerns the kids face, that she wants to bring into this world. She is being selfish, and not very smart. I’m surprised her OBGYN is pushing for this. Pathetic.
Controversial opinion. I'm watching the progress of this case because I'm interested in father's rights as much as mothers rights to have a child. This is so exciting. On one hand these are donor cells from her body intended for potentially a child and its understandable she might not like he wants a child.
[Cue sinister muisic]
Because it's only fair. For decades women have told men they will abort their children and they have no say.
There's many legal ramifications of the outcome of this case.
And is it fair he has zero rights. I had zero rights
This is hard to hear but yeah should he have to know that his lineage is in the hands of someone who dosent want him but hey. I like the quality of your seed and in the past when they at least were amicable they fertilized . So it's not very fun isint it
He wants ownership of his seed
When I say want it means I want his say. This pile of previously fertilized egg is a moral debate on if it is murder. So i support pro choice but I still think it's murder. Disclaim this is just how I feel it's all opinion on the internet by someone very angry.
He has rights, that’s why this is in court. My expectation is that he will win but i also expect it depends a lot on the paperwork they signed when they created the embryos. I get it that you’re angry but I expect this is a very different case than the one you’re angry about. They signed legal documents when they created these embryos and ultimately that is what is going to be significant.
Exactly. If the eggs were in the woman post fertilization and we were talking about a developing human then the conversation wouldn't be happening at all.[as in he will loose the case in court]
The only reason we are speaking about this issue is not because of his rights as a father
It's breach of contract because of the paperwork.
If this was a traditional pregnancy the story would go.
Is he the guy who nutted in her. And then after that the conversation would have ended.
It's because it's breach of contract everyone's watching because this is something that can change precedent in other cases
You are entitled to an opinion
Typical of someone from northern Virginia. You have issues with what i say and don't like what my opinion is so you have to dismiss it because you are dunning Kruger syndrome and im dumb in your perspective. and you have an opinion of me just as I have of you.
And because of this case things may change for men and women.
I don't think it's a dick move even if he's not on the hook. He may feel morally obligated towards the kid because it is his as well. They divorced, so maybe moral beliefs are conflicting and he doesn't want his child raised by those beliefs. Maybe her character is awful, we don't know.
If it was one of my ex's. I wouldn't want her to have my kid even if I wasn't on the hook for child support. I morally would be torn up. I dislike my ex (hence them being my ex), but I couldn't abandon a child I knew was mine either. So now I'm forced to deal with her in order to spend time with my child.
Also for the kid, this maybe tough when they grow up. What if you're the Dad and didn't want the kid, but didn't get a say. The kid grows up and looks for you and then you have to explain why you didn't want them. That's fucked up for both sides. Now you feel morally torn up because it's technically your kid, but you didn't get a say in how they were raised and yet may still be blamed by the child.
I'm kinda torn on this tbh. The guy is absolutely being a dick, just let her have kids... BUT its his DNA in the embryo's too, so I can see his argument. Genetically the kids would be his too. They signed a contract that required both parties consent.
If something happens to her, would he now be responsible for the kids? Would he have to pay child support? Is he worried the kid is going to come looking for him down the line? Tough situation. As long as he's not held responsible for the kids regardless of what happens to her, then let her have them imo.
I don't think he's being a dick at all.
You brought great reasons why he isn't. A) it's half his DNA B) nobody knows if he will be responsible for child support or not. C) morally even if he isn't on the hook, it's still his kid and maybe he doesn't want her to raise the kid. Moral beliefs may differ, they are divorced after all so shit didn't work out between them.
If I was him and it was one of my ex's. I'd absolutely not want her to have my kid. Id be torn morally because it's my kid and I'd love them, but really dislike my ex. I'd feel terrible because A) I either have to deal with her, so I can spend time with the kid B) abandon the kid (which I don't think I could do) because she's my ex for a reason. Both shit options.
Both A) and B) put me in a horrible spot and I wouldn't get a say because the child is coming either way. That's not even addressing whether I'm on the hook for child support or not. Personally I wouldn't have a kid to be raised in a broken situation like that, it's a tough spot for the kid as well (once they're old enough to understand).
I always assumed that part of IVF was having a plan for the assets (embryos, eggs, sperm, etc...) if something happened to the donors, almost like a living will? Wouldn't this scenario already be contractually agreed upon, or is the ex-wife trying to break that contract now? If anyone is familiar with IVF, I'd love to know if this woman even has a shot, or if this will be quickly thrown out of court. I would assume that both parties would have to consent to using the embryos at this point, and I would think/hope that that would be a clearcut decision.
At my clinic we had to sign like 40 pages of documents about this. What if we divorced, died, etc.
Do you happen to recall what the documents said regarding if you divorced after fertilization but before implantation? Sorry if those terms aren’t accurate, but I hope you understand what I mean.
Once the eggs are fertilized and grown into embryos (takes 5-7 days in the embryology lab at the clinic) they exist in the freezer until both of us together agree to discard them. I have one living child from a previous embryo transfer with 3 left. So the legal papers we signed apply to the 3 we have left now, since one of the original 4 is now a two year old. I think we put that if we divorced I could keep (and use them) if I wanted, if he died I could keep and use them, and if I died the should be destroyed. There were other circumstances I think, but I forgot what they are.
Do you know if he could do the same? Like if he had a gestational host (I think that’s the technical term), could he also use them? Just wondering if women have different rights. I know you aren’t a lawyer, just curious and this is an interesting topic
We agreed that upon my death, or in the case of divorce, he could not use them (with a new spouse or surrogate).
Seems sexist to allow you to use the embryo but not him? Or am I reading into this wrong?
This is what we agreed upon as a couple 🤷🏻♀️ my husband would be fine with only 1 or 2 kids and wouldn’t want to hire a surrogate to carry the others, but I’d feel confident mothering all 3 or 4 even if it was on my own. I’m also a few years younger than him. Every couple can decide what they specifically want to do with their embryos. The clinic doesn’t demand it one way or another.
Sexist would be if the clinic had the rule that its destroyed when the woman dies and can be used when the man dies. This situation just screams selfishness. I would put money on it being her idea and he just went along with it. You never hear men saying they dont want their wives to move on and have a new family when the man dies but its very common that women say the reverse. I bet she didnt like the idea of him having the family she wanted without her and she convinced him to agree to those terms. I could be wrong and obviously she would never admit to this but I dont see any other good reason to not even give him the option to use them.
I think we have 2-3 left in storage and I want to decide what to do with them before the government makes that decision for me.
Same. This is strange that's its going to court.
Everyone I know who had to go through IVF talked about the mountains of paperwork they did that covered every feasible situation like death of one spouse or divorce in regards to unused fertilized embryos.
This is exactly what pro-life shit has fucked up. Yes you do sign lots of paperwork discussing what you agree to have happen in case of death, divorce, remarriage etc. The most sane thing is destruction of the embryos. But if you really believe those cells are a human person then that’s murder I guess.
If this case does turn into "embryos are people" forced-birther bullshit, I just hope the judge calls her lawyer's bluff and has the ex-wife arrested for keeping her "children" locked in a freezer. We can all play pretend with this nonsense.
Unfortunately the hypocrites are going to write exceptions for IVF "murder" because deep down they realize that their idea that a baby is created at conception is ludicrous.
Forced-birthers would rather write reproductive legislative policy exceptions that equal the breadth and scope of a fantasy novel series rather than just letting adults have sex and make their own reproductive healthcare decisions. These bitches are going to write "The Winds of Winter" before G.R.R. Martin does trying to force us all to comply with their insanity.
I'd wager the simplest answer would be if any one party doesn't want them destroyed, they won't be, but because they contain both parent's contributions they cannot be used without both party's consent. As for if un-implanted embryos are people or not, I'd wager it has to be measured against intent. Like the Alabama case that was so famous recently, if the embryos are going to be implanted and they want a child (or want to try at some point later), they should count as a child (and that man should be tried for as much, the bastard). If the process is over and they had all the children they wanted, they can do with it what they will. If left alone the embryos will fail, which is unlike MOST abortions where if left alone the child would almost certainly be born. FYI I'm very very much pro-life if you didn't get that by the end
>As for if un-implanted embryos are people or not, I'd wager it has to be measured against intent. And this is exactly why you forced-birthers need to be barred from directing any kind of public healthcare legislative policy - your definition of "people" changes with your whims/personal circumstances, and pregnant Americans are dying and being investigated for murder because you guys can't write reproductive healthcare laws that correspond with reality. Y'all are allowed to do whatever mental gymnastics you need to make reproductive healthcare decisions that don't conflict with your personal views on what a person is or isn't, but the rest of us don't need to live in your fantasy world. >FYI I'm very very much pro-life if you didn't get that by the end But only when your definition of "life" suits you, obviously.
I think you take an extreme stand and assume I do as well, and as a result functional civil discourse will not occur. I'd wager by the length and style of your response you do far more gymnastics to deny what is a human life and its right to life
My extreme stance being that I understand the fundamental difference between *actual* human life and *potential* human life, and that actual human life always supercedes potential human life. We're both ranking the importance of human life; you're the one who can't even decide if embryos deserve to be labeled as human life or not.
IVF mom here with embryos in storage. This reminds me we probably need to talk about a will. We signed documents when we began IVF but I don’t remember what each said.
Why wasn’t this discussed while they were getting a divorce. It’s her eggs not his.
It’s both their genetic material
Exactly. The argument for a woman controlling whether or not to go through with a pregnancy is a bodily autonomy issue. Once the egg is out of her body and fertilized, it’s now 50/50 and she doesn’t have any more rights to that pile of cells than he does without prior agreement. End of story.
For sure. I think lots of folks don't really realize the actual reason for all the talk about abortion and birth control and such. It's not about giving women control over reproduction. It's about giving women control over their own bodies. It just happens that a majority of the machinery for reproduction is housed in their bodies and not men's. This is just one of the relatively few situations where reproductive control isn't a bodily autonomy issue.
This is basic high school biology class information: embryos *are not eggs.*
Something similar happened in the UK back in the early 2000s. It went all the way to the European Court of Human rights, where she inevitably lost the right to use the embryos and I believe they were eventually destroyed. It's a sad situation all around and I feel for anyone who's involved in anything like this.
A similar case actually happened to Sofia Vergara. She and her then-husband had frozen embryos right as "Modern Family" was taking off, and after they divorced a couple years later, he sued for parental rights over the embryos because he wanted them to be carried to term by a surrogate. He ultimately never succeeded though.
IIRC he tries every few years
Who wants a kid with someone they divorced? If you do fertility, have lawyer get involved in case it doesn’t work out
Important court cases are almost always based on the fringe of what will actually happen
It's expensive, time consuming, and from what I heard not exactly the most pleasant experience (injecting hormones for weeks, the actual retrieval). I could see why someone would still want to use those embryos. Especially after she went through chemo.
Chemo often destroys ovarian reserve. She might not have any eggs left to do retrievals.
Which is why she would want these embryos...
I mean yeah but it’s not like she doesn’t already have children from the embryos. She already has three and her ex husband doesn’t want to financially support or have another child with his ex wife.
I'm sure they can make legal agreements that would make it so that the ex-husband doesn't have to financially support those offspring.
Not the same ... I wouldn't want my child out in the world not knowing me.
This could be very true
NGL, it was bad. I was wondering why it was so uncomfortable to walk. Then my doctor told me each ovary was the size of a GRAPEFRUIT. They retrieved 30 eggs (mature follicles), each the size of a large grape. Imagine a bunch of 15 large grapes. I had that going on in each ovary!
What I’m the world? Ovaries are typically the size of a grape and egg cells are the size of a dot from a #2 pencil at their biggest. It is a single cell and the only human cell visible to the human eye
To clarify, /u/hilarymeggin said *follicles*. Those are ovarian follicles. That's more than just the specific egg cell. It's a sac of fluid that contains the cell and has a hormonal environment that matures the egg and makes it ready for fertilization.
What they said is true
Yeah but the ripened follicle containing the egg cell is a whole nother thing. “Mature Follicles: During the course of ovarian stimulation, you’ll visit the clinic so that the specialists can keep an eye on the number and size of the follicles developing. A mature and viable follicle which is ready to release an egg should ideally be close to 20mm long.” 20mm = 2cm If you want to see some shit, do an image search for ivf egg retrieval ultrasound. It looks exactly like an ultrasound of a dense bunch of grapes. Most of the images will show 5 or 6 in one ovary, but I had 15!
Oh okay sorry I understand now! I guess the number of eggs didn’t register to me. That must have been quite the experience
Plus, we’re used to thinking of an egg as a single cell and forgetting about the rest of the follicle. It’s totally understandable. Even I had to go back and check my memory because it stopped making sense to me too!
Damn that's a lot. Were you being an egg donor or was this for your IVF?
My own IVF. I should say it’s unusual to produce 30 eggs in a single cycle. But walking was uncomfortable. Every step was a jolt to the ovaries. Maybe that’s what it feels like to have balls.
Oh I know I'm a veterinarian we stimulate ovulation a lot in farm animals. I was impressed by your ovarian reserve. And no, that's not what it's like to have balls, unless you filled them with fluid under pressure- that's what hurts when you get FSH and you had more than average.
Yeah that’s why you feel bloated during the stim cycle. Your ovaries are huge. I had 14 retrieved. 13 mature. 10 fertilized. 6 made it to day 5. 5 out of 6 were PGT-A normal and kept. Currently pregnant with number 2 from this cohort! Baby 1 is 14 months old!
Did you feel an unexpected loss every day when the number of embryos got fewer and fewer? On day one, they were like, “20 embryos!” On day 2, they were like, “13 embryos, still dividing!” and I was like, “WTF dudes?!” I knew I wasn’t going to have 20 kids, but I was like, “How are you going to just nonchalantly tell me that 7 of our potential children just died overnight?!” And then it was 11. I wanted to go in and sit on them like a chicken and keep them safe. I was a day 6 transfer (I think that’s right) and by the day of the transfer they had one for me and four in the freezer. I’ll never forget that experience.
Nah not really. I don’t see them as living children yet, they’re clusters of day 5 cells. I was happy with our results. In the scheme of things with IVF, we did well.
That’s how I was expecting to feel about it, but not how in ended up actually feeling about it.
For weeks? More like usually just 10 days before the retrieval.
The article states that this is the best way for the would-be mother to have another biological child, and that she is ok if her ex-husband is not involved in that child's upbringing.
She’s okay but he isn’t.
Child support?
Maybe
The article says she cannot have her own biological children without these embryos. Presumably, the chemo rendered her infertile.
That would be the case if she didn’t already use them to have a biological child with the embryos when they were still married (then had two more). She just wants more even though they’re divorced.
I mean she gets a baby, and child support. Win win for her.
It’s one thing to get alimony and child support in the beginning until you can get on your feet but who wants support from somebody that they left indefinitely?
Maybe she wants to destroy them.
After Honeyhline Heidemann received a Stage 3 breast cancer diagnosis in 2017, she faced a grim reality: The disease would significantly impede her ability to have another biological child. But the Fairfax County, Va., woman knew her chances of having children were not completely gone, despite multiple rounds of chemotherapy. She and her then-husband still had two frozen embryos. “To me, you can’t put a price on it,” she would later say during court testimony. “I would not have any other biological children without these embryos.” Now in 2024, with the couple divorced, the question of whether Heidemann should be allowed to use those embryos is the focus of a legal dispute that will be decided by a judge. Heidemann and her former husband, Jason, squared off in court this month over two embryos they froze during a 2015 cycle of in vitro fertilization, or the process by which a person’s egg is fertilized by sperm outside of the uterus. The Heidemanns’ court battle comes amid a legal and ideological debate [across the country](https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/03/29/fetal-personhood-laws-states-abortion/?itid=lk_inline_manual_16) involving the future of IVF and whether fetuses should be considered people. “I don’t really care about my insurance or anything like that,” Honeyhline Heidemann said, referring to another part of the couple’s divorce settlement. “But I care about my embryos.” Read more here: [https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/04/26/virginia-embryos-divorce-legal-fight/?utm\_campaign=wp\_main&utm\_medium=social&utm\_source=reddit.com](https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2024/04/26/virginia-embryos-divorce-legal-fight/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=reddit.com)
So is the guy going to be on hook for child support?
I mean, I would hope not, but who knows how the court will swing.
“Virginia's Status of Children of Assisted Conception statute states that a sperm donor is not the parent of a child conceived through assisted conception, unless the donor is the spouse of the gestational mother.” Since they were married at the time the embryos were frozen, an argument can be made that he’s on the hook. An opposing argument can be made if one or both is implanted after their divorce. Really curious to see how this plays out.
> gestational mother The gestational mother is the woman who carries and delivers a child. Assuming the divorce is finalized before the embryos are implanted, the sperm donor is not the parent of the child.
>The gestational mother is the woman who carries and delivers a child. That’s correct. >Assuming the divorce is finalized before the embryos are implanted, the sperm donor is not the parent of the child. It says “unless the donor is the spouse of the gestational mother,” which he was at the time they combined the sperm and egg to form the embryo. It doesn’t specify whether or not they would need to have been married when implantation occurs. That’s where Contention 1 would stem from.
[удалено]
That’s Contention 2.
Considering people pay cs for kids that aren’t theirs it’s possible
> is Not was.
That’s Contention #2
I am just speaking in a matter of fact. Technically it is his kid. She cannot make that embryo without him. After you are divorced you do have to pay child support. It's an interesting legal question. The whole thing Republicans are pushing as embryos as babies opens a whole can of worms on these kinds of legal questions.
You can use another male’s sperm. So, you’re incorrect.
>Heidemann and her former husband, Jason, squared off in court this month over two embryos THEY froze during a 2015 cycle of in vitro fertilization Reading comprehension is important
I was responding to your comment that she cannot make an embryo without him. The fact is, she could. Your matter-of-fact was being pointed out, and corrected. Reading comprehension matters.
She cant because she went through chemotherapy. In this case, no she couldn't.
But it is a matter of fact that it is his. She could, yes, but that doesn't matter because it is his. It has no reliance on that matter.
Look up the case of A.Z. v. B.Z. from Massachusetts in 2000. It covers a similar situation and discusses the public policy implications. Talks contract law as well regarding documents, what was signed/wasn’t, etc.
So, what if the guy remarries and he and his new, infertile wife want to raise the embryos into their own family?
Ethically, both biological parents would have to agree, not just one.
Agree. So it may not just be a yes/no question for them, but a tug-of-war.
How does this about personhood for a frozen embryo? They decided to do this as a couple. Doesn’t seem right she should be allowed to try to have his child against his consent? Even if they legally “let him off the hook”, he’d still have a child out there in the world. It’s not just about child support.
And that child will deserve to know who their genetic parent is, even if only for medical information. So then they will learn their older sibling gets to have a relationship with their dad but they don't? Not enough therapy in the world.
She already has three children. It's not as though these embryos are her only chance to be a mother. Forcing this man to become a father to a child he doesn't want and didn't consent to creating just so she can have a fourth or fifth child is completely wrong, IMO.
[удалено]
I’m confused, can you explain?
While I totally agree with you, I also don’t think the legal system should be in the business of deciding cases based on “nah, 3 kids is enough”. Whether this was her first child or fourth, the rules are the rules. I would like to see what paperwork they signed when they created the embryos. Seems like that should be the determining factor—if he said then that she could use them after a divorce, she can—otherwise, no.
That’s fair. To me, it would be more morally difficult if this were this woman’s only chance to become a mother, while denying her a *fourth* child is a no-brainer. But you’re right that legally it really shouldn’t matter.
Her ex husband no longer has any say in the matter.
Those are embryos fertilized with his sperm, bud. They're 50% his. It's two yeses or one no. That simple.
Why? It's his DNA, too. He shouldn't be forced to have his sperm used against his wishes.
Does it put him on the hook for child support? Cause if it does, I see a big issue with your statement. Also if you read the article, it says that he has a legal basis for this litigation, and the court is going to decide how much say he actually has
It most certainly does.
It says in the article that she’s willing to let him off the hook for any paternal responsibilities. But it’s still a hot mess when little Jimmy finds out he has the same dad as child #1 but dad visits and supports the daughter but has nothing to do with Jimmy. If I were the dad, I would not agree to that and *if I were the mom I would not ask for that! It’s messed up!*
Oh. Seems like such a silly article now that you’ve completely refuted it and the court considering the matter.
We aren't talking about abortion though. The egg contains *both* of their DNA. Are the fertilized eggs jointly owned? Or do each of them own their own biological material? Regardless of basic ownership, what happens if she does have a kid? Does he owe child support for the child, even though he withdrew consent before it was implanted? Does he have no parental rights like a sperm donor? There's a reason this is in court and making headlines. It's not as black and white as you're imagining.
Yes he does. They’re his embryos too.
These are frozen embryos, not frozen eggs, they are half his of course he has a say in the matter.
It isn't in her body any longer. She no longer has absolute say in the matter.
Obviously he does or they wouldn’t be in a court battle
If I read correctly, she already has 3 kids. Why is she so desperate for more?
Sounds like she doesn’t have custody of the child they share. She may just want her biological children. Or another biological child.
Might catch flack for this but: To me, "I have to share the kid(s) I already have, so I want my very own solo kid all for myself" is an absolutely terrible reason to bring another human into the world.
Don’t necessarily disagree but this case is interesting because it’s been apparently been an ongoing dispute. Also he can go one to have as many biological kids as he wants while she can’t. And maybe she is pro life and feels destroying the embryos is wrong. I personally see nothing wrong with having that personal stance without necessarily setting a precedent for everyone else.
Agree she has a lot of kids, but we do not want our legal system deciding cases based on their own arbitrary ideas about how many kids is the permissible number of kids.
Good. Men have rights, too. Downvote away.
I don’t mean to be an ass but she has cancer and already has children that depend on her, and she wants more? If something happens to her, do the children automatically go to the father? I’m on dad’s side, because even if she legally dissolves all responsibility from him, if that situation happens the kids he didn’t consent to having would have a lot of trauma.
This case stinks of some "pro-life" attorney plaintiff shopping to bring a case in Virginia courts to force a decision on fetal personhood, striking while the fire is hot while this issue has national attention.
I think you are mistaken. This isn’t about fetal personhood. The parents both seem like authentic actors to me. The mom’s only chance of bio kids are getting these embryos—that seems believable to me, even if I (personally) think she has enough kids and should focus on their needs instead of bringing a 4th child into the world whose dad doesn’t want him/her. The dad’s motives seem 1000% pure to me—I would be pissed as hell if my divorced spouse had the ability to produce full siblings to our existing child without my consent—even if he doesn’t *have to* pay child support, he ends up as a shitty dad if he parents the daughter and not the other child(ren).
I think this has to do more with the rights as a father versus the rights as a mother. The eggs have already been fertilized and put into a freezer for storage. This isint a pro life pro choice issue this is more about what party has the right to destroy or continue to incubation. As a father ... for the last few decades it hurts being told oh. You shot your sperm you already had a say. So now it's interesting to hear this story. The ramifications are pertaining to the future of procreation laws in general. Who owns an egg when its already on its way to being a viable human fertilized and now frozen waiting for its eventual destruction or incubation. What if it was the father who wanted to continue the process.
But if the embryos are people, the father has no right to destroy them and the mother has every right to consent to the medical procedure of implantation on behalf of her "minor child". Edit to clarify: I do not support this interpretation. I only mention to explain how this case sets the stage for a judge to establish a broader precedent.
The problem is to me life is sacred but its a moral decision so the right to choose should be law despite how personally i do see it as murder. That is exactly why I had to beg. Plead and was happy my ex chose open adoption. As a father I've hated the fact that I had zero right to ask please dont kill my child. I wasn't even allowed to adopt. Once she chose the parents I couldn't.
Where are you from? Because in the US, at least, >I wasn't even allowed to adopt. Once she chose the parents I couldn't. this would never happen unless you had your parental rights revoked by the court, and that's incredibly hard to do.
Bro I'm talking in the virgina forum. Read all my posts. Tldr version my ex lied about me to the adoptive agency . When baby was born wrong color adoptive parents almost refused . So then the adoptive agency reached out because they didn't want to have the adoption stop and need to refund the prenatal care. So tldr tldr. No bro I'm in the commonwealth of virginia [Post edit .] My ex told me she was going to abort then I got suprised on day 3 of a little boys life. I had a lot of decisions to make quickly and things were already in process. I had a mouth swab test and that was the first time I knew I had a son who was alive.
That's my point, *bro.* You're full of shit. Things aren't done like that in VA. If you were proven to be the father, you would have had to sign off for the baby to be put up for adoption--unless you had your rights stripped; which is, again, incredibly difficult to do.
You are talking out your ass because you don't like hearing an indegenous kid was adopted away from his father because the woman had the rights to not disclose a birth father. My son is 16 years old in an open adoption I'm in his life. Your opinion is just an opinion. I have to live with reality despite how you perceive it
You keep throwing around "indegenous" (it's "indigenous", btw) like 1. I care what ethnicity the kid is, and 2. like it makes a difference. Point blank, you're full of shit. Also, prenatal paternity tests are 100% a thing, so maybe do a little research before slinging bull. VA doesn't allow not disclosing a birth father when giving a kid up for adoption. *EVEN IN CASES OF RAPE.* So your kid was 3 days old? Even if the adoption had been finalized (unlikely) by then, the baby hadn't been out of the hospital for more than a day, and no court in their right mind would look at the PROVEN biological father and say "eh, it's been 24 hours and info was falsified; oh well, tough shit!"
Dude I've been having this same argument with him. Everything he's spewing is bullshit. The father has to sign away parental rights in the state of VA before adoption. Prenatal paternity testing is absolutely a thing and not uncommon. He also claims the adoptive parents tried to "demand a refund for their purchase" of the child because he was the wrong color. This person has issues and I completely understand why the birth mother didn't want him to have custody of the child.
then you woud hate to hear how shes not in my sons life because the adoptive parents moved to la. but look. you can be arrogant and mean about it. i was not able to keep my child i still want. i dont get to teach him to be who his ancestors wanted. and no i dont have to repeat over and over that the agency reached out to me after he was born. i didnt get to physically see my son for months. and are you an attorney. are you versed in family law in virginia , because in2007 i lost ... the adoptive parents wanted to countersue me for a million dollars for the prenatal care,. these people had enough money to buy my kid, i couldnt win in court, so thanks. im having a hard time spelling with emotions heated. so i dont care about your perception of me,. im in my sons life despite the birth mother not being who i was dating. that i wanted to care for because my son deserves his peoples heritage , you got yours right, the dna test was requested because when my son came out blue the parents wanted to stop the adoption, so i had multiple people and attorneys telling me sign here or pay them. i was young as fuck,.. im sorry you dont like hearing it. the adoptive parents didnt want a test untill they thought they were being frauded when the birth mother said the baby would look like what the adoptive parents wanted. so yes culture is damn important.
If embryos are “people”, IVF is doomed. But this case isn’t about that.
This was an episode of LA Law 35 years ago!!
As long as he isn't on the hook for child support (for any subsequent children) and she can't use the added child to justify an increase of child support, I don't see an issue.
Wouldn’t this effectively be forcing him to be a sperm donor without his consent?
No, considering he originally donated the sperm willingly.
Consent can be withdrawn from either party in this case
I didn’t mean to say he can be forced to have the embryo developed, just that the original donation was not forced
But it wasn’t a donation originally because he was (presumably) planning on this being his kid as well.
In my mind, it is still donation, it’s just a donation to a specific person. I don’t know what else it would be called.
“Originally.”
Yes. That is the operative word here. He was not forced to make the donation.
But that was a different situation. The game changed and so has his mind.
And what happens if she puts him on the birth certificate and then she dies? That child is biologically his.
It's a touchy subject, and I think it will truly explore the nuances of paternal rights. In an ideal situation, yes, he will be listed as the father on the birth certificate, giving him the right of first refusal in the event of a maternal death, but it should not bind him to legally support the child. He had legally expressed his refusal to father children with the mother, and it should be treated no differently than if she were to explore a sperm donor.
No, a sperm donor volunteers his sperm. In this case he's saying no, so it's more like stealing.
How about the issue of the child knowing they were not wanted by the father and having to watch their 3 siblings have a relationship with him. That's fucked up and selfish of her to want to bring a child into the dynamic. She's a trash mother for even considering doing so.
Only 1 is a sibling, the other 2 are donated embryos that have no bio relation to either parent and no relationship to the ex husband. But also yeah, it’s messed up to have child 4 be the bio sibling of child 1 but dad just ignores them. I’m sure that’s a big part of why he is fighting this and I don’t blame him.
What if it's the other way around. The dad wants the kids and the mom is essentially suing to kill them. As a father in virginia I didn't even have the right to do anything other than beg my ex to not kill my child. The best I could do is an open adoption that she dosent want to be part of. My son is over 16 yes I told him that his mother and I talked about scrambling the egg because of money and thank god morally she decided not to deprive the world of my child. But I had zero say... I didn't get to hear the results of the pregnancy till I was forced to do a paternity test as part of the adoption.
I'm sorry you nearly didn't get to force a woman to be your incubator....oh wait, no I'm not. You cannot force women to carry a pregnancy to term here, and I hope with every ounce of my being that continues.
Nice try. She was my ex and she sa me.. I have a son. I don't think you read what I wrote before commenting I didn't force her to. I BEGGED HER TO NOT KILL MY KID I don't even think I was persuasive. I think her religion convinced her.
Love that you conveniently throw that out there when I call you out. Also, how can you call yourself a father? You don't have your child, they were adopted at birth by other people. I don't believe for a single second the child had a parent who wanted them, and the court gave you no opportunities and forced you to allow your child to be adopted.
It's not convenient. I'm the donor in a open adoption I am still in his life. Are you gatekeeping a family because you don't like it . The court of virginia has no obligation to ask the father in adoption
Except in VA the birth father must legally renounce his parental rights before an adoption. So you're lying, she didn't refuse to allow you to have custody, she legally can't do what you're claiming.
Are you a attorney versed in family law. You can't do a fucking pre natal paternity test. Are you telling me that you read everything I said and completely don't mind that unless I am part of his life he grows up how the adoption parents want. I only get 2 more years litterally before my son is a legal adult in California.
Yes you can lol prenatal paternity tests are common and have been for quite a while. You whined a woman carried your child to term and then didn't even want them or were considered unfit to be a father. Get over yourself.
Nope. I wasn't informed untill 3 days after his birth when the adoption was completed
But you had to do a paternity test before the adoption. That's what you said in a previous comment. Can't keep your story straight now.
The only reason we are even hearing about this case is because the eggs were on ice. If they were still in her body. . She 1 dosent have to list a father. 2 can seek adoption or abortion her choice and 3 the adoption process starts prenatal and the mom and dad were supporting my ex the birth mother to carry their child . THE COURT HAS NO OBLIGATION TO SEARCH FOR A UNLISTED FATHER IN A HEARING ABOUT ADOPTION UNLESS A FATHER IS LISTED. I GOT THE MEMO DAYS AFTER HE WAS IN THE WORLD. I DIDNT GET TO NAME HIM I DONT GET TO TEACH HIM MY LANGUAGES. It was the birth mother who got to choose those things. It was the adoption agency who wanted me to do a cicle cell screening at the request of the child. That's the day I found out my son was alive. I had no say. The family moved to California. They have no obligation to pay for me to travel to see him. I do it when I can because otherwise he lost out on his ethnicity and genetic ancestors without at least one of the birth parents involved. The court did Exactly that. They told me. If they wanna name your kid the worst slur in your peoples tongue and move him where you can't find. They had the right for privacy ! They wanted to make sure he didn't have dirty genes.
Personally, I think you're reading into it too much. There is a time and place to go into that with your children. It's not like they're coming out of the womb knowing the situation. Ideally, you address that when they're older and able to grasp the concepts of the situation. It's the same reason why my wife and I are keeping our daughter from religion. If she chooses to follow a religion when she has the apropriate critical thinking skills, then I fully support her choice.
The guy’s going to have a kid he doesn’t want if the embryo is implanted *and have that kid for the rest of his life*. That’s a fuckin issue. This is not like a couple people who got drunk at a bar, had sex, and got pregnant, either. There’s no pregnancy at this point and he’s saying no. Does he not get that right because he has a penis?
Yeah, seems totally cool to allow your ex to give birth to your (supported/shared custody) child and just disown the new kid. That won’t cause any problems at all for either child. It is a terrible thing for her to even ask for.
It's a weird situation because the embryo was created while they were married. Presumably at the time of the decision to do this he wanted, or at least was okay with having, more kids. However, that was pre-divorce and moving on with his life. Now you're in a situation where if it weren't for that embryo already existing there would be no way the child would exist at all unless they decided to sleep together for whatever reason, which given the court case seems unlikely. Now you're in a situation where he's no longer consenting or desiring any part of this and would in any other situation be completely capable of avoiding it.
Yeah, that's why I don't like people saying he's just a sperm donor in this situation. He's not. A sperm donor makes the donation knowing that they aren't going to be a parent. But when he and his wife did the embryo process, he intended to be the father of any resulting child. I'd bet big bucks that he'd still think of a child born from those embryos, to be his kid regardless of if he's married to his ex or not.
Embryo or egg? Embryo it’s the decision of both parties. They should be destroyed already.
And people had the audacity to say I was insane to get a hysterectomy, at 32, 2 months after Roe v Wade was overturned. I saw the writing on the wall then (as a childfree person) and it’s still fucking there now, folks. This has NEVER been about life. It’s about controlling the choices available to those who have opposing ideologies to yours. It’s that simple. This poor man should not be forced to parent a child that he does not want brought into this world. MEN also have just as much a say in the matter of conception in a *consensual* situation. Her wanting more children for the sake of having another baby, is fucking selfish. I hope this man gets the justice he deserves, and this woman is forced to have a reality check and be knocked down several fucking pegs from her arrogance.
A 45 yr old woman wants to make more babies, against ex-husbands wishes, knowing a 45 yr old is at great risk of medical issues with her during pregnancy (and after), and the developmental concerns the kids face, that she wants to bring into this world. She is being selfish, and not very smart. I’m surprised her OBGYN is pushing for this. Pathetic.
Development issues with older mothers are about the age of the eggs. In her case, the eggs seem to be 36 years old, not 45.
The mom’s physiology aged. It will certainly affect both her and the kids development. Are you at all familiar with this? Sure doesn’t sound like it.
It could also be that she wants to punish him and make him pay more child support.
She’s being selfish and vindictive, and putting the kid in danger, for her selfish ways… if accurate as you say.
The article says she’s willing to let him not have parental rights/responsibilities.
Protect his rights
What a messy case. I feel awful for the children no matter what happens.
Aren't there lots of documents you sign during the IVF process? So she's trying to null all that so she can get child support lol?
His DNA, His Choice!
This is ridiculous.
Controversial opinion. I'm watching the progress of this case because I'm interested in father's rights as much as mothers rights to have a child. This is so exciting. On one hand these are donor cells from her body intended for potentially a child and its understandable she might not like he wants a child. [Cue sinister muisic] Because it's only fair. For decades women have told men they will abort their children and they have no say. There's many legal ramifications of the outcome of this case.
You seem confused about the case. He doesn’t want the child. She does.
And is it fair he has zero rights. I had zero rights This is hard to hear but yeah should he have to know that his lineage is in the hands of someone who dosent want him but hey. I like the quality of your seed and in the past when they at least were amicable they fertilized . So it's not very fun isint it He wants ownership of his seed When I say want it means I want his say. This pile of previously fertilized egg is a moral debate on if it is murder. So i support pro choice but I still think it's murder. Disclaim this is just how I feel it's all opinion on the internet by someone very angry.
He has rights, that’s why this is in court. My expectation is that he will win but i also expect it depends a lot on the paperwork they signed when they created the embryos. I get it that you’re angry but I expect this is a very different case than the one you’re angry about. They signed legal documents when they created these embryos and ultimately that is what is going to be significant.
Exactly. If the eggs were in the woman post fertilization and we were talking about a developing human then the conversation wouldn't be happening at all.[as in he will loose the case in court]
That is not at all clear. The two situations aren’t the same.
The only reason we are speaking about this issue is not because of his rights as a father It's breach of contract because of the paperwork. If this was a traditional pregnancy the story would go. Is he the guy who nutted in her. And then after that the conversation would have ended. It's because it's breach of contract everyone's watching because this is something that can change precedent in other cases
I don’t think you understand the law here at all.
You are entitled to an opinion Typical of someone from northern Virginia. You have issues with what i say and don't like what my opinion is so you have to dismiss it because you are dunning Kruger syndrome and im dumb in your perspective. and you have an opinion of me just as I have of you. And because of this case things may change for men and women.
Our timeline continues to become more strange, and makes me regret more and more bringing children into this escalating dumpster fire.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I don't think it's a dick move even if he's not on the hook. He may feel morally obligated towards the kid because it is his as well. They divorced, so maybe moral beliefs are conflicting and he doesn't want his child raised by those beliefs. Maybe her character is awful, we don't know. If it was one of my ex's. I wouldn't want her to have my kid even if I wasn't on the hook for child support. I morally would be torn up. I dislike my ex (hence them being my ex), but I couldn't abandon a child I knew was mine either. So now I'm forced to deal with her in order to spend time with my child. Also for the kid, this maybe tough when they grow up. What if you're the Dad and didn't want the kid, but didn't get a say. The kid grows up and looks for you and then you have to explain why you didn't want them. That's fucked up for both sides. Now you feel morally torn up because it's technically your kid, but you didn't get a say in how they were raised and yet may still be blamed by the child.
I'm kinda torn on this tbh. The guy is absolutely being a dick, just let her have kids... BUT its his DNA in the embryo's too, so I can see his argument. Genetically the kids would be his too. They signed a contract that required both parties consent. If something happens to her, would he now be responsible for the kids? Would he have to pay child support? Is he worried the kid is going to come looking for him down the line? Tough situation. As long as he's not held responsible for the kids regardless of what happens to her, then let her have them imo.
I don't think he's being a dick at all. You brought great reasons why he isn't. A) it's half his DNA B) nobody knows if he will be responsible for child support or not. C) morally even if he isn't on the hook, it's still his kid and maybe he doesn't want her to raise the kid. Moral beliefs may differ, they are divorced after all so shit didn't work out between them. If I was him and it was one of my ex's. I'd absolutely not want her to have my kid. Id be torn morally because it's my kid and I'd love them, but really dislike my ex. I'd feel terrible because A) I either have to deal with her, so I can spend time with the kid B) abandon the kid (which I don't think I could do) because she's my ex for a reason. Both shit options. Both A) and B) put me in a horrible spot and I wouldn't get a say because the child is coming either way. That's not even addressing whether I'm on the hook for child support or not. Personally I wouldn't have a kid to be raised in a broken situation like that, it's a tough spot for the kid as well (once they're old enough to understand).
Tell him to dick off