Quantcast
4S Ranch Allied Gardens Alpine Baja Balboa Park Bankers Hill Barrio Logan Bay Ho Bay Park Black Mountain Ranch Blossom Valley Bonita Bonsall Borrego Springs Boulevard Campo Cardiff-by-the-Sea Carlsbad Carmel Mountain Carmel Valley Chollas View Chula Vista City College City Heights Clairemont College Area Coronado CSU San Marcos Cuyamaca College Del Cerro Del Mar Descanso Downtown San Diego Eastlake East Village El Cajon Emerald Hills Encanto Encinitas Escondido Fallbrook Fletcher Hills Golden Hill Grant Hill Grantville Grossmont College Guatay Harbor Island Hillcrest Imperial Beach Imperial Valley Jacumba Jamacha-Lomita Jamul Julian Kearny Mesa Kensington La Jolla Lakeside La Mesa Lemon Grove Leucadia Liberty Station Lincoln Acres Lincoln Park Linda Vista Little Italy Logan Heights Mesa College Midway District MiraCosta College Miramar Miramar College Mira Mesa Mission Beach Mission Hills Mission Valley Mountain View Mount Hope Mount Laguna National City Nestor Normal Heights North Park Oak Park Ocean Beach Oceanside Old Town Otay Mesa Pacific Beach Pala Palomar College Palomar Mountain Paradise Hills Pauma Valley Pine Valley Point Loma Point Loma Nazarene Potrero Poway Rainbow Ramona Rancho Bernardo Rancho Penasquitos Rancho San Diego Rancho Santa Fe Rolando San Carlos San Marcos San Onofre Santa Ysabel Santee San Ysidro Scripps Ranch SDSU Serra Mesa Shelltown Shelter Island Sherman Heights Skyline Solana Beach Sorrento Valley Southcrest South Park Southwestern College Spring Valley Stockton Talmadge Temecula Tierrasanta Tijuana UCSD University City University Heights USD Valencia Park Valley Center Vista Warner Springs

Who owns the embryos?

Casualties of embryonic legal warfare

Human embryo, 8–9 weeks
Human embryo, 8–9 weeks

Post Title: The Fate of Frozen Embryos at Divorce

Post Date: December 2, 2015

As times change and technology evolves, new issues are ever-present in divorce law. And, although deep emotions lie at the center of almost every divorce, the courts, in making their decisions, look at the laws and don’t take emotions into account.

When Dr. Mimi C. Lee found out that she had breast cancer just before her marriage to Stephen Findley in 2010, the couple decided to create embryos and have them frozen, so as to preserve what might be her only chance to have biological children. Before the couple went to create the embryos, they signed a contract with the clinic. The contract stated that the embryos would be destroyed if they divorced.

Unfortunately, a mere three years later the couple separated. Their divorce was finalized in early 2015. Later, a judge had to decide the fate of their frozen embryos. Dr. Lee wanted to keep the embryos, as they still may have represented her last chance to have biological children. Mr. Findley wanted the embryos destroyed, as he did not want the potential to be the father of a child with his now ex-wife after a less-than-pleasant divorce from the woman. He asked that the court enforce the agreement they entered into at the time the embryos were created.

Dr. Lee argued that she had a right to procreate and also argued that she would agree to waive child-support payments for any children created from the embryos. She further argued that she had a right to change the agreement that was entered into at the time the embryos were created.

The judge — who issued a tentative ruling in this case on Wednesday, November 18 — disagreed. The judge recognized that although Dr. Lee certainly does have a right to procreate, she doesn’t have the right to do so with the unwilling Mr. Findley. Further, Dr. Lee’s claims that she would waive child-support were meaningless, as such agreements cannot be entered into in California. The judge found that the parties had to abide by the prior agreement, meaning that the embryos had to be destroyed as a result of the parties’ divorce.

It is certainly easy to sympathize with Dr. Lee, as cancer may have reduced her ability to have children on her own. The judge had to rule on a deeply personal matter in this couple’s lives, which admittedly may cause a greater impact in Dr. Lee’s life than it did in her now-ex-husband’s life, as he is now able to move on and can procreate if he so chooses. However, it makes sense that the court cannot force this man, who does not want to become a father with his ex-spouse, to become a father anyway.

Interestingly, judges in other states have ruled differently on the same issue, and have instead taken the woman’s side. This happened several years ago in Pennsylvania, where a court awarded frozen embryos to a woman with breast cancer over her ex-husband’s objections. And a court in Illinois awarded frozen embryos to an infertile woman against her ex-boyfriend’s objections.

The difference is the law in California, which requires couples to decide up-front what happens to the embryos that they create in the event of separation or divorce. This is the first time a California court has made a ruling on this issue. The judge, in her written decision, had the following to say:

“Decisions about family and children often are difficult, and can be wrenching when they become disputes.

“The policy best suited to ensuring that these disputes are resolved in a clear-eyed manner…is to give effect to the intentions of the parties at the time of the decision at issue.

“It is a disturbing consequence of modern biological technology that the fate of nascent human life, which the embryos in this case represent, must be determined in a court by reference to cold legal principles.”

Title: San Diego Divorce Attorneys Blog | Author: Nancy J. Bickford, APC | From: Carmel Valley | Blogging since: 2011

Here's something you might be interested in.
Submit a free classified
or view all

Previous article

The unsinkable Linda Broyles

“I mean, when they said I couldn’t go home, I could see Coronado!”
Human embryo, 8–9 weeks
Human embryo, 8–9 weeks

Post Title: The Fate of Frozen Embryos at Divorce

Post Date: December 2, 2015

As times change and technology evolves, new issues are ever-present in divorce law. And, although deep emotions lie at the center of almost every divorce, the courts, in making their decisions, look at the laws and don’t take emotions into account.

When Dr. Mimi C. Lee found out that she had breast cancer just before her marriage to Stephen Findley in 2010, the couple decided to create embryos and have them frozen, so as to preserve what might be her only chance to have biological children. Before the couple went to create the embryos, they signed a contract with the clinic. The contract stated that the embryos would be destroyed if they divorced.

Unfortunately, a mere three years later the couple separated. Their divorce was finalized in early 2015. Later, a judge had to decide the fate of their frozen embryos. Dr. Lee wanted to keep the embryos, as they still may have represented her last chance to have biological children. Mr. Findley wanted the embryos destroyed, as he did not want the potential to be the father of a child with his now ex-wife after a less-than-pleasant divorce from the woman. He asked that the court enforce the agreement they entered into at the time the embryos were created.

Dr. Lee argued that she had a right to procreate and also argued that she would agree to waive child-support payments for any children created from the embryos. She further argued that she had a right to change the agreement that was entered into at the time the embryos were created.

The judge — who issued a tentative ruling in this case on Wednesday, November 18 — disagreed. The judge recognized that although Dr. Lee certainly does have a right to procreate, she doesn’t have the right to do so with the unwilling Mr. Findley. Further, Dr. Lee’s claims that she would waive child-support were meaningless, as such agreements cannot be entered into in California. The judge found that the parties had to abide by the prior agreement, meaning that the embryos had to be destroyed as a result of the parties’ divorce.

It is certainly easy to sympathize with Dr. Lee, as cancer may have reduced her ability to have children on her own. The judge had to rule on a deeply personal matter in this couple’s lives, which admittedly may cause a greater impact in Dr. Lee’s life than it did in her now-ex-husband’s life, as he is now able to move on and can procreate if he so chooses. However, it makes sense that the court cannot force this man, who does not want to become a father with his ex-spouse, to become a father anyway.

Interestingly, judges in other states have ruled differently on the same issue, and have instead taken the woman’s side. This happened several years ago in Pennsylvania, where a court awarded frozen embryos to a woman with breast cancer over her ex-husband’s objections. And a court in Illinois awarded frozen embryos to an infertile woman against her ex-boyfriend’s objections.

The difference is the law in California, which requires couples to decide up-front what happens to the embryos that they create in the event of separation or divorce. This is the first time a California court has made a ruling on this issue. The judge, in her written decision, had the following to say:

“Decisions about family and children often are difficult, and can be wrenching when they become disputes.

“The policy best suited to ensuring that these disputes are resolved in a clear-eyed manner…is to give effect to the intentions of the parties at the time of the decision at issue.

“It is a disturbing consequence of modern biological technology that the fate of nascent human life, which the embryos in this case represent, must be determined in a court by reference to cold legal principles.”

Title: San Diego Divorce Attorneys Blog | Author: Nancy J. Bickford, APC | From: Carmel Valley | Blogging since: 2011

Sponsored
Here's something you might be interested in.
Submit a free classified
or view all
Previous article

Building paradise in San Diego

Mission Valley, Tijuana gardens, Otay Mesa, downtown skyscrapers, One Paseo, Rancho Santa Fe mansion
Next Article

Moved to tears by Dave’s Hot Chicken

Nashville hot chicken ranges from no spice, to hot, to the indemnified “reaper”
Comments
1

She could have frozen her own eggs at any time she wanted. This was the right call... it's morally wrong to make the dude the father of some kid when he doesn't want to be involved, especially in CA where he automatically becomes liable for support.

Dec. 17, 2015

Sign in to comment

Sign in

Art Reviews — W.S. Di Piero's eye on exhibits Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed Best Buys — San Diego shopping Big Screen — Movie commentary Blurt — Music's inside track Booze News — San Diego spirits City Lights — News and politics Classical Music — Immortal beauty Classifieds — Free and easy Cover Stories — Front-page features Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts Famous Former Neighbors — Next-door celebs Feast! — Food & drink reviews Feature Stories — Local news & stories From the Archives — Spotlight on the past Golden Dreams — Talk of the town Here's the Deal — Chad Deal's watering holes Just Announced — The scoop on shows Letters — Our inbox [email protected] — Local movie buffs share favorites Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news News Ticker — News & politics Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated Of Note — Concert picks Out & About — What's Happening Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated Poetry — The old and the new Pour Over — Grab a cup Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers Reading — The hunt for intellectuals Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails San Diego Beer News — Inside San Diego suds SD on the QT — Almost factual news Set 'em Up Joe — Bartenders' drink recipes Sheep and Goats — Places of worship Special Issues — The best of Sports — Athletics without gush Street Style — San Diego streets have style Suit Up — Fashion tips for dudes Theater Reviews — Local productions Theater antireviews — Narrow your search Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads Waterfront — All things ocean Your Week — Daily event picks
4S Ranch Allied Gardens Alpine Baja Balboa Park Bankers Hill Barrio Logan Bay Ho Bay Park Black Mountain Ranch Blossom Valley Bonita Bonsall Borrego Springs Boulevard Campo Cardiff-by-the-Sea Carlsbad Carmel Mountain Carmel Valley Chollas View Chula Vista City College City Heights Clairemont College Area Coronado CSU San Marcos Cuyamaca College Del Cerro Del Mar Descanso Downtown San Diego Eastlake East Village El Cajon Emerald Hills Encanto Encinitas Escondido Fallbrook Fletcher Hills Golden Hill Grant Hill Grantville Grossmont College Guatay Harbor Island Hillcrest Imperial Beach Imperial Valley Jacumba Jamacha-Lomita Jamul Julian Kearny Mesa Kensington La Jolla Lakeside La Mesa Lemon Grove Leucadia Liberty Station Lincoln Acres Lincoln Park Linda Vista Little Italy Logan Heights Mesa College Midway District MiraCosta College Miramar Miramar College Mira Mesa Mission Beach Mission Hills Mission Valley Mountain View Mount Hope Mount Laguna National City Nestor Normal Heights North Park Oak Park Ocean Beach Oceanside Old Town Otay Mesa Pacific Beach Pala Palomar College Palomar Mountain Paradise Hills Pauma Valley Pine Valley Point Loma Point Loma Nazarene Potrero Poway Rainbow Ramona Rancho Bernardo Rancho Penasquitos Rancho San Diego Rancho Santa Fe Rolando San Carlos San Marcos San Onofre Santa Ysabel Santee San Ysidro Scripps Ranch SDSU Serra Mesa Shelltown Shelter Island Sherman Heights Skyline Solana Beach Sorrento Valley Southcrest South Park Southwestern College Spring Valley Stockton Talmadge Temecula Tierrasanta Tijuana UCSD University City University Heights USD Valencia Park Valley Center Vista Warner Springs
Close