Arizona woman can use fertilized embryos to get pregnant without ex's consent

[therealstegblob]

Your reasoning as to what is rape would make it so that at any time after sex, you could claim it is rape if the outcome isn't what was wanted.
> We had sex, and now I'm pregnant. I didn't consent to pregnancy. Rape.

It's not rape, though it is an INCREDIBLY disgusting ruling on the part of the courts.

No one is saying it was LITERALLY rape, or LITERALLY comparable to rape. That it was essentially an issue of consent being given, later revoked and then that revoke not being honored.

[kail]

This is literally the equivalent of him being raped.

No it isn't, not even close. He willingly fertilized them in the past regardless of his reasons. It is a conflicting case because the embryos are created by both parties so do they both have equal say on what happens to them? Of that I don't see a right answer. It's like co-owning something 50-50, who decides what to do with the item in question?

I am siding with Terrel (the guy) on this one just because there is a clear contract backing him. The new law that was passed by the state that is pretty much a life preservation stance, almost pro-life. They want the kid to be made. It's a dumb law but not the worst thing I've seen if it doesn't affect the other party.

If he becomes financially responsible for the kid, then I'd see the ruling as fucked.

[markos82]

You need to read up on how this works, because you have unrealistic expectations about how this procedure happens. At most they can harvest 15-20 eggs every 2 months. With that number you could make 15-20 babies. Or 0, because it's a roll of the dice. If they were to harvest more, they might cause OHSS and kill her before the cancer did.

Any preserved eggs are too valuable in this case.

Well i kinda know how it works since my best friend and his wife got kids that way. The point is, they ( the couple ) agreed on something and made a contract to be sure, things didn't went like they planed and now she wants the get out of that contract because she/they didn't planned ahead. In this case i think she was the one, they fertilized all eggs just to be sure but like I said, if she had plans to keep in accordance to contract she would make a backup plan and have unfertilized eggs as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Not if she wants biological children. She saved eggs for precisely that reason.

She didnt saved eggs, she saved embryos, huge difference. If she wanted to have her own children and don't be bound to contract she could have saved her unfertilized eggs as well as fertilized ones. Then if shit happens ( like it did ) she would have a different option, to have unfertilized eggs fertilized by unknown donor or new man in her life.

[xenogear3]

THINK: How does she get your fertilized embryos first place?

[Knaar]

So they breached the contract signed at the clinic... i see many more lawsuit coming in their near futur!

[Kumorii]

It's extremely fucked up. They aren't even together anymore. How can he be held responsible for HER embryos? Fuck Arizona.

It's both HERS and HIS embryos.

[Alexeht]

I feel like this guy get what he deserved by playing in this in vitro garbage game

[ipaq]

This is literally the equivalent of him being raped. The embryos should be destroyed not given to her just because SHE wants them. He agreed to using his sperm to fertilize the eggs because she wanted to use her ex-boyfriend's sperm instead of her husbands because HE didn't want to do it. The courts are wrong in this decision. This woman should not have custody of the embryos under any circumstances. And if you read the article, she only wants to implant them if she REMARRIES SOMEONE ELSE. That's bullshit!

Incel troll being an incel.

1. ex will have no obligation;
2. its here embryo too after all;
3. its her body after all;

I would have adopt from a local orphanage instead, but that is my opinion and my business.

[markos82]

THINK: How does she get your fertilized embryos first place?

Feel free to think, let me help you, They ( doctors ) take them out and fertilize them with sperm and then they freeze those fertilized eggs. Once the eggs is fertilized it is not longer just an egg. So again, she could have saved unfertilized eggs in case something like this happens.

[Mehrunes]

Incel troll being an incel.

1. ex will have no obligation;
2. its here embryo too after all;
3. its her body after all;

I would have adopt from a local orphanage instead, but that is my opinion and my business.

1. Actually read the last paragraph of the article.
2. Which doesn't give her much of a say over them, it gives her an equal say.
3. How is "it's her body" even a factor in the discussion here when the embryos are not in her body?

[Mistame]

The judge in this case is an idiot and should be canned.

The entire verdict is based upon the fact that he was simply a sperm donor, even if known to the woman. Read the article. He agreed to be the donor when it was put to him that this was optional. Now he is not happy..well, boohoo. He knew from the get go that this was done to safe guard her eggs and he agreed. Is it incredibly stupid on all sides, yes, but that does not make him a victim.

He agreed to be the donor under the pretense that the eggs would only be used with his consent. She agreed to the same conditions as he did. The ruling is wrong, period. Also, prior to implantation, one never loses the rights to one's own genetic material. Given that the embryos are genetically half his, the contract shouldn't even be necessary. The state of fertilization is irrelevant and this ruling is the equivalent of the court ordering the clinic to give the woman his frozen sperm.

1. ex will have no obligation;

False. States very rarely find in favor of the father, as they rule in favor of what's best for the child.

2. its here embryo too after all;

He has just as much right to the embryos as she does. And according to the contract, a lack of consent from both parties negates any use of them.

3. its her body after all;

This is irrelevant.

[markos82]

1. ex will have no obligation;
2. its here embryo too after all;
3. its her body after all;

I would have adopt from a local orphanage instead, but that is my opinion and my business.

1. If you read the article then no, he would likely have to pay for child support.
2. Eggs are hers, embryos nope, then share 50% of her DNA and 50% of his DNA so he has the right and saying as much as she does.
3. What does that have to do with anything, the embryos are still frozen, they didn't had sex and she got pregnant.

[xenogear3]

Feel free to think, let me help you, They ( doctors ) take them out and fertilize them with sperm and then they freeze those fertilized eggs. Once the eggs is fertilized it is not longer just an egg. So again, she could have saved unfertilized eggs in case something like this happens.

In other words, they were married at some point.
In this case, he should pay child support, even they are divorced later.

[Mistame]

In other words, they were married at some point.
In this case, he should pay child support, even they are divorced later.

No, they were never married. Not sure how you're coming to that conclusion. And regardless of their married status, he shouldn't be required to pay child support for her using the embryos without his permission.

[xenogear3]

No, they were never married. Not sure how you're coming to that conclusion. And regardless of their married status, he shouldn't be required to pay child support for her using the embryos without his permission.

Then he should not pay the child support.

As for she "steals" his fertilized embryos, that is her problem.

[markos82]

In other words, they were married at some point.
In this case, he should pay child support, even they are divorced later.

No they were not and them being married or not doesn't have anything to do with this. They made a contract, she broke it and he has to suffer? Why?
She didn't get pregnant during sex, she still isn't pregnant, her eggs are fertilized by the clinic using his sperm, thats all.

- - - Updated - - -

Then he should not pay the child support.

As for she "steals" his fertilized embryos, that is her problem.

He shouldn't pay either way, their marital status doesn't have anything to do with him paying child support. Even if they were married he shouldn't pay for child support because she got herself pregnant without his consent and by breaking contract.

[markos82]

Yeah id rather someone used my frozen genetic material rather than rape me

Even if you need to pay 100s of thousands of dollars in next 18 years or so?

[markos82]

Yeah. It is a pretty easy choice

TBH i dont know if i rather be a slave to someone for 2 decades or someones bitch for 5min.

[Najnaj]

The judge in this case is an idiot and should be canned.



He agreed to be the donor under the pretense that the eggs would only be used with his consent. She agreed to the same conditions as he did. The ruling is wrong, period. Also, prior to implantation, one never loses the rights to one's own genetic material. Given that the embryos are genetically half his, the contract shouldn't even be necessary. The state of fertilization is irrelevant and this ruling is the equivalent of the court ordering the clinic to give the woman his frozen sperm.

This would be correct if the intention was for the couple to have kids and the contract was not a standard one that everyone signed. We have gone over this many times already and he is the one who insisted that he fertilize the eggs knowing full well that the reason was that she had a fair chance of becoming infertile in the near future.

- - - Updated - - -

No they were not and them being married or not doesn't have anything to do with this. They made a contract, she broke it and he has to suffer? Why?
She didn't get pregnant during sex, she still isn't pregnant, her eggs are fertilized by the clinic using his sperm, thats all.

The problem here is that there are 2 "contracts", one written and one verbal. No one is contesting this bit. The written one is a standard contract made by the clinic and the verbal agreement they had was that he was fertilizing her eggs so safeguard against future infertility due to radiation treatments. She offered to get the sperm from someone else and he is the one who insisted that she use his.

The way I see it is that the entire situation is stupid but at least she is just stupid. He is stupid and an ahole trying to go back on his word. He knew full well what he was doing and after it turns out that she is indeed infertile after her cancer treatment he tries to go back on his word using a random generic contract that no one payed much attention too at the time.

[Temp name]

TBH i dont know if i rather be a slave to someone for 2 decades or someones bitch for 5min.

One will mentally scar you for the rest of your life, the other won't. I know for sure which one I'd rather.

Especially since if you're raped, you might still end up with a baby and be on the hook for the money. source: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/n...port/14953965/