Friday Legal Updates - California Bill, Chicago Scammer, Ohio (oh, my), DC & same sex couples, & International Issues

Hello!   I am back after a two week hiatus on my Friday Legal Updates, but it is summer so the wheels of justice turn slowly, as does legislation.  Either way, here are today's updates for the last few weeks:

California - The California Legislature is getting back into the Prop 8 fight with a bill that would recognize those same-sex marriages performed legally outside of California before the measure had passed.  SB54 also intends to ensure that gay and lesbian couples who have been married legally in other states and countries since November 5th when Prop 8 became official can receive all the rights and obligations that opposite sex Californian couples enjoy.

Illinois - More couples are coming out of the woodwork regarding a surrogate who had scammed them into believing that she was pregnant with their baby.  Beware!

Ohio - A Republican lawmaker in Ohio is re-introducing a bill that would give a man the final choice on whether the woman he got pregnant can have an abortion.  I am so "impressed" that a man can force a woman to keep the baby, but the bill mentions nothing about forcing him to be a good father or provide financial stability. 

DC - A new DC law is making it alot easier for a newborn to have two moms at birth.  Lesbians who create a child via artificial insemination will no longer have to adopt their children that have been born to their partners.  A similar law is to go into effect in New Mexico in 2010.  This is a huge step for same sex couples, as they do not have to go through the time consuming and expensive legal process that is not required of heterosexual couples who use artificial insemination. 

Croatia - Croatia continues to tighten their laws on fertility treatments by forbiding the freezing of embryos.  It also limits the number of embryos used to three and for unmarried couples, they must prove that they have been together for at least three years. 

Romania - 30 Israelis were detained in an egg trafficking case.  It sounds like the issue is on its way to being resolved from more recent reports; however, I certainly hope that this is not an issue of human trafficking. 

Subscribe to my blog here.  

The American Fertility Association & The Frozen Embryo Dilemma

With so much in the press these days about donor anonymity and how to handle that in the future, I wanted to post an article from the AFA that also talks about how to deal with the future issues in ART.  Enjoy, and let me know your thoughts!

"A Matter of Privacy, Responsibility and Choice

It’s a private issue gone very public. It’s a complex web of personal philosophy, religious orientation and social conscience about which everybody, and we mean everybody, has a strong opinion. But the fact is, and should be, what you do with the frozen embryos you don’t use is your decision and yours alone.

Of course it never feels like the quite right time to discuss this touchy topic.

Maybe you’re taking your first steps on the infertility treatment path. Along with all the mind-numbingly complicated instructions, you’re handed a form asking you what to do with excess embryos before you have a single one.

Maybe you already beat the odds. With absolute devotion, you danced the assisted reproduction tango, created viable embryos and made a baby. Or two or three. Your family is complete. Your head is bursting with school, soccer, recitals and bedtimes. Frozen embryos?

Or maybe you’ve given up on treatment, leaving behind the heartbreak, the disappointment and possibly, a few fertilized eggs. You’ve moved on.

So chances are pretty good that those embryos, protected in liquid nitrogen, aren’t at the top of your to-do list. None of us who have experienced infertility anticipates having any embryos, let alone extras. After we’re done with ART, we tend to ignore or deny the delicate question of disposition of the unexpected surplus.

At some point, though, all of us with cryopreserved embryos will have to make a final and forever decision about them. It’s not easy. They’re our unique responsibility and our unique burden. Because while our embryos remain suspended in time, we don’t.

Hence, this fact sheet, a guide to anticipating some of the quandaries we confront and exploring the choices we have.

The Options

A good initial cryopresevation consent agreement usually outlines three disposition choices:

  • Thawing without intent to transfer. Lucinda Veeck, M.L.T.,D.Sc., Director of Embryology at the Center for Reproductive Medicine and Infertility in New York City, says at her program, 53% of the 364 patients who have gone through with their choice have elected this option.
  • Donation for research. While raging controversy and federal limits have restricted directed giving to stem cell research, there are myriad other well-accepted research initiatives, such as staining for DNA and genetic analysis that rely on embryos. And despite the ban on federal funding for stem cell work, privately funded institutions are moving forward. Reports Dr. Michael Alper of Boston IVF, one such center, “There is no shortage of donations.
    At CRMI, Dr. Veeck reports that about 41% of patients have gone the research route.
  • Donation to other infertile people. Logistically and emotionally complex, donation for transfer has its own guidelines established by the American Society of Reproductive Medicine. It’s a many-layered effort by both the donors and recipients, requiring a six-month quarantine of the embryo, blood and genetic testing and retesting of donors, blood tests for the recipients. Both parties must sign informed consent documents addressing relinquishment and acceptance of parental rights should children result, as well as liability, among other things. Whether or not it is an anonymous transaction, both donors and recipients are strongly urged to get psychological counseling.
    “We’ve only donated embryos from two patients because of the difficulties inherent to follow-up testing,” remarks Dr. Veeck. “And in the 6% group desiring to donate, most have not actually given away their embryos yet.”

How Was I Supposed To Know?

These days, even before there’s an embryo, there’s the consent form. That daunting document demanding that a patient know, ahead of time, what to do with remaining embryos…if there are any. For infertile people, that’s one incomprehensibly huge “if.”

So hopeful patients fill in the blanks with the best intentions. The rub is that when it actually comes time to act on that initial agreement, people often find that first choice isn’t the one they want after all. It’s important to remember that first consent form is not the actual disposition form. You can shift gears at any time.

Changes of heart happen for a million different reasons: divorce, the death of a spouse, economic hardship, a multiple birth after the first cycle. Sometimes the partners in a relationship simply aren’t on the same page – one may want more children, the other has no interest. One partner may see the embryos as their potential children, the other regards them as left over sperm and eggs.

Inevitably, life’s constant evolution leads to embryos that sit, sometimes for an embarrassingly long time.

“People have them frozen and then forget about them,” says Dr. David Hoffman, Medical Director at IVF Florida/Reproductive Associates in Margate, Florida. “But they still don’t want to get rid of them. I don’t think patients think of a frozen embryo as a person, but it’s tough to let go.”

Dr. Veeck adds, “Many patients respond by doing nothing. They continue paying for storage fees rather than make a decision. And I think that’s the appropriate thing until they’re quite sure what they want to do.”

Behind the Choices

The language of disposition seems straightforward and precise. In fact, most people are sandbagged by how profoundly affected, confused and conflicted they are when it comes time to commit.

So, most elect to do nothing. Make no mistake; doing nothing is making a decision. Endless postponements means someone else-a family member or the clinic—may get stuck on the horns of what is rightfully your dilemma.

Overwhelmingly, frozen embryos are intended for use by the couples that created them. But IVF centers around the country report that the sheer number in storage is putting a squeeze on space, with some embryos in residence for a decade or more. Increasingly, centers are attempting to contact patients who haven’t been active for several years. It can be an onerous and difficult task, and on occasion, pointless.

At CRMI, Dr. Veeck puts the abandonment rate at about 10%. That’s after three registered letters, using search agencies and making countless phone calls.

Not all clinics have the wherewithal or the intention of going to such lengths. But most clinics will not dispose of embryos without an explicit, legal go-ahead from patients.
For the most part, says Dr. Hoffman, “couples usually pop up out of nowhere” when they’re notified that unless they respond, the embryos will be discarded.

Contrary to all the hype, Dr. Hoffman notes there are “very few not spoken for. The government thinks there are huge numbers out there. But there aren’t a lot of abandoned embryos at all.”

In other words, the vast majority of us with excess embryos are left to wrestle with our personal convictions and moral codes.

What Gives Meaning

For some people, contributing their embryos to research in an effort to help others gives them a sense that their assisted reproductive efforts have lasting value. “It’s a way of giving back to medicine and it makes them feel good,” says Dr. Alper of Boston IVF.

For others non-viable thawing provides closure. “It’s interesting, but people are very relieved when their embryos are discarded,” observes Adele Kauffman, Ph.D., and program psychologist at Reproductive Science Center in Waltham and Boston. “Embryos in the freezer are unfinished business. Once it’s done, they feel they’ve come full circle.”

Still others, impelled by altruism, empathy, or religious beliefs to help other infertile people, want to offer their frozen fertilized eggs for transfer.

“Initially, I thought it would be the option everyone would choose,” says Dr. Veeck at CRMI. “But when they think that they might have offspring out there and not know them or how they’re going to be brought up, they usually reconsider.”

In a recently published article, Dr. Craig Syrop at the University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, notes that

Of 365 couples with embryos stored after two years, 12% “indicated a willingness to donate to other couples (was) nearly equal to the desire of couples to donate to research.” But, he finds, when faced with the “reality of clinic visits for counseling, STD testing, and informed consent before embryos are donated and utilized” interest wanes and research outstrips donation to others by nearly 2 to 1.

The Donation Drama

Embryo donation for transfer is a media magnet, drawing tremendous attention when some began referring to transfer donation as “embryo adoption.” It is not.

“Adoption is a specific legal framework with specific guidelines around parental rights and obligations and applies to only living children,” says Susan Crockin, a Boston area attorney specializing in reproductive matters. She calls donation for transfer a “positive, but limited” option. She notes that five states have laws on the books dealing with this form of embryo donation, but nowhere is it the legal equivalent of adoption.

While the federal government is on the cusp of launching public education campaign advocating “embryo adoption,” Crockin calls it a misnomer that may make people feel good but “glosses over the legal reality.” At a minimum she recommends a legal agreement between donor and recipient; and consider, in those states without an embryo donation law, that the recipients go to court to have themselves declared the parents of a resulting offspring to avert the risk of custodial claims by the genetic parents or the extended family.

However, things blur on the psychosocial front where, psychologists say, the adoption parallel is stronger.

Embryo donors and recipients should expect that resulting offspring will want information about their genealogy, their genetic makeup, and their biological parents. Donors must be prepared for the possibility of a knock on their door one day even if the transaction was strictly anonymous. As decades of experience with adoption have shown, kids will come searching. Furthermore, laws protecting anonymity are subject to change.

“We’re in uncharted territory here,” said Dr. Elaine Gordon, a Los Angeles psychologist. Dr. Gordon says she’s getting more inquiries about embryo donation for transfer but many go nowhere.

“They find it too complicated and overwhelming in terms of what’s required,” she observes. “If they’re going to do it right, does it mean engaging in a relationship with the recipient couple and do they want to participate in that?”

She suggests that “responsibly done” ovum donation might provide the best model, with both parties entering into a “contract detailing terms of contact, if any, and information disclosed and exchanged. If the two parties can come to a meeting of the minds, the exchange can take place, facilitated by psychological, medical and legal experts.”

Embryo Donation Programs

There are several embryo donation programs, including the Christian faith-based agency, Snowflakes, that promotes “adoption.” At the root, all the programs facilitate matching donors with potential recipients and work through the details of the exchange.

“We’re a private (non-sectarian) agency and we liaise between the recipient and the donor,” explains Eileen Dover, executive director of Genesis Family Services in Holly Pond, Alabama.

Recipients send in a $100 application fee, list their requirements and are put on a waiting list until the right match pops up. The total agency cost to recipients is $1,800 but they’re also responsible for shipping, donor medical testing, notary feels, and a flat $250 attorney fee. Donors, who also can specify requirements for a receiving family, fill in a standard questionnaire, including medical history. Genesis’ simple-language but comprehensive contract requires adherence to the ASRM guidelines, but the agency leaves that to the donor’s doctor.

While Genesis doesn’t require psychological counseling, the contract calls for recipients to pay for up to three sessions for the donor, if the donor chooses. Dover also says, “we ask recipients to get counseling as well, but that’s their responsibility.”

Genesis advocates closed donations but will go with client’s wishes for open ones.

“We try to encourage transferring four embryos,” says Dover. “If you have 10 embryos (eggs that are fertilized, frozen but haven’t started dividing yet), you may get four to six that live through the thawing process. If they’re blastocysts (5-day-old embryos), there’s a darn good chance they’re going to do well and I don’t think any physician would do more than two or three.”

In Fullerton, California, Snowflakes operates on the assumption that this is an adoption. “In our program, we focus on the end result which is the child. That’s the same in all adoptions,” says JoAnn Eiman, a Snowflakes spokesperson.

The Christian faith-based agency requires recipient families undergo a homestudy, a fundamental process in traditional adoption, but controversial in embryo donation for transfer. As Eiman explains it, about 20% of the homestudy is about child abuse and Department of Justice background checks. “The other 80% is preparing the parent for a non-genetically linked child,” she says. The agency does both closed and open donations, depending on the preferences of the parties.

Snowflakes fees to recipients are about $4,000 for the matching, legal contract, shipping, coordination, rematching if required and lifetime support.

Begun in 1997, the first Snowflakes baby was born in 1998. In 1999 there were a couple of matches but no births. But by 2002 there were a total of 18 babies born and this year, Snowflakes expects another 23.

Do donors who’ve gone this far change their minds? “Most don’t but it happens,” said Eiman. “Typically when the donor couple gets a profile on the adoptive family they say ‘Oh my goodness, this is real. They’re going to take them and raise them.’ When they get the packet that’s when it hits them.”

It’s a whole new world, agrees Dover at Genesis. “It remains to be seen whether (donors) really get that they’re going to have children out there. They say, ‘Yes, I understand.’ But what’s going to happen 20 years down the road? I think about that when I’m whiting out the records and I think someday someone might want to look at that.”

When It’s All Too Confusing

Okay. We’re all pretty clear that the “what is to be done” with extra frozen embryos is at best confusing. The American Fertility Association strongly urges that you weigh the following to help ease the strain:

  1. Nobody has control over your embryos but you.
  2. You are not obligated to stick with your first decision or your second or third. The no-turning-back point comes only after you’ve formally and legally relinquished ownership of your embryos.
  3. Know that it is absolutely fine to wait as long as it takes for you to make the decision that feels right for you. No government, social or religious entity should force you into taking an action that, in your gut, you know is a personal mistake. Because you will have to live with this decision forever.
  4. Donating to other couples is a real and generous alternative. The AFA recommends you thoroughly explore the legal, psychological and emotional implications and potential long-term ramifications. You must feel confident that you can deal with the possible outcomes down the road.
  5. Thawing without intent to transfer is a perfectly reasonable option that most couples do choose, finding it provides the unexpected relief of closure. Yes, there may very well be grief and counseling or support that can serve you well.

We at The American Fertility Association will continue to report, write and provide you with as much information about this topic as we can. But, as one of the leading patient advocate groups, The AFA is always available to you, to answer questions, provide support and referrals. Please call our toll-free number (888) 917-3777. It always helps to talk with those who’ve been through it, too. "

Subscribe to my blog here.

Friday Legal Updates - Embryos, Surrogacy, & Reproductive Tourism Revisited

Happy Friday to one and all!  I am excited about spending a weekend in Los Angeles.  There have been some interesting articles posted over the last week from over the world.  Read and give me your thoughts.  Have a great weekend to all.

Montana - Lesbian Custody Case - Another case of "you are not the parent" explained in detail by Julie Shapiro, who has a great blog with alot of information on many legal issues.  Of course, one of the women did not adopt the children, which would likely not be allowed in Montana, and the other woman wants full custody.  It is another unfortunate case that is even bringing in the Alliance Defense Fund, who opposes gay/lesbian rights.  So, go figure.  It is before the Montana Supreme Court, so we will keep an eye on this one. 

National - Single Embryo Transfer: Why Not Put All Your Eggs in One Basket?  Great article by Dr. Petok via the American Fertility Association.  A great response to the Octomom debacle and the move towards fewer embryos being transferred. 

Australia - Incubated Embryos Destroyed after Sydney IVF Malfunction.   This is a sad situation - I certainly hope that the end result is good for all of these patients. 

Ireland - Irish Couples Face an Uphill Struggle with Surrogacy Laws.  Surrogacy at home in Ireland is almost impossible, even though there are no laws banning such practices.  There is an adoption required, which makes this possibility virtually impossible unless it involves a family member.  And, with changes in the law in the UK in 2005, that country is no longer an option as it was in the past. 

Singapore - Singapore is now allowing reimbursement for altruistic living organ donations.  The regulations and requirements will ultimately fall in the hands of the medical ethics boards in order to determine who is a healthy donor and who is acting altruistically.  The Health Ministry now also has a plan in place as to how this will be done.  Is this a step in the right direction?  What do you think? 

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

FRIDAY LEGAL UPDATES - Gay Rights, Fertility, Embryos, Georgia Legislation, Surrogacy & India

Today's updates are short but sweet, as I am swamped today!

Here they are in shortened form:

Connecticut - The State lawmakers are considering updating state law to conform with a court ruling that allows that allows same-sex marriages, opponents of gay marriage fear their effort will go too far to promote homosexuality.

Massachusetts - A former Massachusetts woman has pleaded guilty to mail fraud and other charges for selling fertility drugs on the internet

Georgia - Update: Success as Georgia Legislation SB 169 is stripped of prohibition on cryopreservation of embryos.

Israel - Israel grants work leave for a gay man for the birth of his son via a surrogate.

New Zealand - Separated couple in dispute over frozen embryos that they created together in 2000.  No children have resulted from the other embryos; however, the woman wants to try again, despite the fact that they are separated.  The male partner will not permit her to use them or to donate them to another couple.  

India - Regulators are now pushing surrogacy legislation as the business continues to grow daily

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

Georgia Bill Requiring Oversight on IVF Likely Dead Until Next Year

 

According to Medical News Today and National Partnership, it looks as if the Georgia bill (SB169) is “dead” until next year. We had all suspected that this would happen, but again, we need to remain vigilant, as they may try and slip it through next year

This Georgia bill was the first attempt in the US to restrict the number of embryos implanted into a woman following IVF, and is now being following by Missouri. Critics, such as Resolve and AFA, feel that the bills will produce devastating effects on those who want to have children but cannot without the help of IVF.

I am certain that this topic will be greatly debated at ASRM this year, and I look forward to being a part of that. I would also like to know what your thoughts on this are and how you can help this sort of “reactive” legislation from being enacted in your own state?

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

FRIDAY LEGAL UPDATES - State of Georgia Still On Legislative Alert, Missouri Targeting Fertility Treatments, New York, etc.

Georgia – Update from this week’s legislation n Georgia. SB169 has already been addressed at the subcommittee level, and they have made some decisions, although not certain what they are at this time. In fact, this went through much quicker through subcommittee than others had suspected – which is why I told everyone yesterday that the “best defense is a good offense.” Now is definitely not the time to sit back and wait. 

The legislature is also hearing bill HB388 today, which effectively would to change the definition of "child" to include a human embryo. 

As for SB 204, it is expected to be heard next week, which effectively would make embryo donation follow the same rules as adoption. 

Missouri – Rep. Dr. Rob Schaaf, a Republican, has proposed state legislation intended to prevent any woman undergoing IVF there from following the “Octomom’s” example. His bill, HB810, if passed would limit the number of embryos a physician can implant into a woman as delineated in the guidelines via the ASRM guidelines. Of course, this bill will then subject doctors in the state to discipline by the Missouri Board of Registration if the rule is violated. The legislation does not prevent physicians from recommending that women can seek fertility treatment outside of the state. ASRM supports this bill.

New YorkA New York Appeals Court has denied a couple the right to their son’s sperm in order to have a grandchild with the help of a surrogate mother. The son left sperm samples back in 1997, but ordered them destroyed if he died since his intent was to father a child if he survived his cancer, which he did not. A judge stated that state law bars the use of stored semen by a surrogate without certain blood tests, which can no longer be done.

UK – According to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology authority, a single woman can name “almost anyone” as a second parent after IVF, man or woman, so long as they agree. This new Act goes into effect on April 6 and the only restrictions will be naming a blood relative or lack of consent by the person. This Act nows opens the doors to lesbians both being named on the birth certificate, which is a big step. Sperm donors cannot be named unless they consent.

Korea – The South District Court in South Korea rejected a lawsuit about the egg donation procedures used in the cloning research of disgraced former Seoul National University researcher Woo Suk Hwang. Two women who had donated eggs through the University brought he lawsuit against the Korean government, MizMedi Hospital and Hangyang University Hospital. The government’s case again Hwang continues.

IrelandThe Supreme Court rejected a woman’s request for the right to make additional submissions in a appeal to determine the fate of three frozen embryos between her and her estranged husband. This woman contentions involve the issue that an embryo is an “unborn.”   The case itself between the couple remains open. 

Subscribe to my blog here

Creating Designer Children Causes Stir in IVF Community

A Los Angeles Clinic, and not the octuplet doctor if you must ask, is now offering their patients the "option" to select genetic traits to those who want it - eye color, hair color, skin color, freckles.  Is this a marketing ploy, or is this really possible?  I understand the concept of PGD, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, but does it really provide the opportunity for this sort of selection? 

When I first read the articles, I was immediately concerned, as I knew that this sort of "weird science" would cause quite a stir, which we really do not need right now in the IVF community after the octuplet mess.

Well, read for yourselves, and let me know what you think.

According to the Wall Street Journal, "A Los Angeles clinic says it will soon help couples select both gender and physical traits in a baby when they undergo a form of fertility treatment. The clinic, Fertility Institutes, says it has received "half a dozen" requests for the service, which is based on a procedure called pre-implantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD." 

"While PGD has long been used for the medical purpose of averting life-threatening diseases in children, the science behind it has quietly progressed to the point that it could potentially be used to create designer babies. It isn't clear that Fertility Institutes can yet deliver on its claims of trait selection. But the growth of PGD, unfettered by any state or federal regulations in the U.S., has accelerated genetic knowledge swiftly enough that pre-selecting cosmetic traits in a baby is no longer the stuff of science fiction.

'It's technically feasible and it can be done,' says Mark Hughes, a pioneer of the PGD process and director of Genesis Genetics Institute, a large fertility laboratory in Detroit. However, he adds that 'no legitimate lab would get into it and, if they did, they'd be ostracized.'

But Fertility Institutes disagrees. 'This is cosmetic medicine,' says Jeff Steinberg, director of the clinic that is advertising gender and physical trait selection on its Web site. 'Others are frightened by the criticism but we have no problems with it."

Click Here for Complete Article in the WSJ

Click Here for Complete Article in BBC News

Theresa M. Erickson, Esq.
Surrogacy & Egg Donation Center    
www.ConceptualOptions.com

 

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

North Dakota House Gives Fertilized Eggs Human Status

News just out of North Dakota - we have a bill pending that intends to give a fertilized human egg the legal rights of a human being.  It appears that the intention is to put a complete ban on abortion in that state.  However, based on the field that I am in, I am concerned what it will do to the infertile couple/person with embryos frozen in that state.  What are your thoughts after reading below?

"BISMARCK, N.D. -- A measure approved by the North Dakota House gives a fertilized human egg the legal rights of a human being, a step that would essentially ban abortion in the state.

The bill is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that extended abortion rights nationwide, supporters of the legislation said.

Representatives voted 51-41 to approve the measure Tuesday. It now moves to the North Dakota Senate for its review.

The bill declares that "any organism with the genome of homo sapiens" is a person protected by rights granted by the North Dakota Constitution and state laws.

The measure's sponsor, Rep. Dan Ruby, R-Minot, said the legislation did not automatically ban abortion. Ruby has introduced bills in previous sessions of the Legislature to prohibit abortion in North Dakota.

"This language is not as aggressive as the direct ban legislation that I've proposed in the past," Ruby said during House floor debate on Tuesday. "This is very simply defining when life begins, and giving that life some protections under our Constitution - the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

Critics of the measure say it will cost millions of dollars to defend. Ruby said the state has been willing to go to bat for other principles that were less important.

In Oklahoma, meanwhile, a state House committee Tuesday approved legislation that would prohibit physicians from performing abortions solely on account of the gender of a woman's fetus, even though the measure's author said there is no evidence the practice has ever occurred in the state.

The legislation passed 20-2 by the House Public Health Committee. The bill now goes to the full House for consideration.

The author of the bill, Rep. Dan Sullivan, R-Tulsa, said it is designed to stop couples from using the gender of a fetus as a reason to get an abortion. Sullivan said a doctor would be prohibited from performing an abortion if the mother specifically said the fetus' sex was the reason.

However, he said there is no evidence the practice has occurred in Oklahoma. "I haven't received any definite information that proves it," Sullivan said."

Click Here for Complete Article at Fox News

Theresa M. Erickson, Esq.
Surrogacy Lawyer & Egg Donation Lawyer 
www.EricksonLaw.net

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

Ireland Supreme Court Begins Hearing on the Use of Embryos After Divorce

With all of the news surrounding the octuplets, I figured I would let the dust settle for a while and address the couple in Ireland fighting over their embryos. 

As reported by the IrishTimes.com, "A man who separated from his wife after agreeing to her undergoing fertility treatment is prevented both by the Constitution and various documents signed by him from stopping her having the remaining embryos implanted in her womb with a view to becoming pregnant again, the Supreme Court was told today.

The State, because of the 1983 constitutional amendment requiring it to protect and indicate the right to life of the unborn, must facilitate the implantation of the remaining embryos, Gerard Hogan SC, for the woman, said.

Asked by Mr Justice Adrian Hardiman if the State is always required to facilitate implantation of viable embryos, counsel said he was not arguing women could be coerced into carrying embryos.

In this case, the woman could not be denied implantation as she wanted to provide “a home” for the embryos. Her attitude was a “highly relevant factor” in determining the extent of the State’s obligations towards these particular embryos."

How do you think the court should rule?  As for me, having written on behalf of Randy Roman in the case of Roman v. Roman for the US Supreme Court, my vote is for the husband.

Click Here for the Complete Article

Theresa M. Erickson, Esq.
Surrogacy Lawyer & Egg Donation Lawyer 
www.EricksonLaw.net

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

The Coming War over our Embryos - Slate Weighs In

Slate has written a very provocative article regarding the fate of embryos in the US and where potential legislation may be moving. 

"Last week at the White House, President Bush showcased embryo adoption as an alternative to embryonic stem-cell research. The event alarmed the in vitro fertilization industry. Proponents of embryo adoption "have an explicit political agenda to actually take away choices from infertility patients," an industry spokesman told the New York Times.

Actually, an explicit agenda is what pro-lifers don't yet have. Already overwhelmed by patient advocates in the fight over stem cells, they have no death wish to confront the millions of Americans whose families have tried IVF. Promoting embryo adoption—finding somebody to rescue surplus embryos so IVF couples can go on making them and leaving them behind—is an attempt to avoid that confrontation. But last week's House debate over stem cells signaled that the confrontation is coming. Pro-lifers don't think anyone, including a parent, has the right to doom an embryo to death. They're on a collision course with IVF."
 
I am interested to hear what others have to say on this issue, especially those patients now facing this issue in their own lives. 
 
 

Theresa M. Erickson, Esq.
Surrogacy & Egg Donation Center    
www.ConceptualOptions.com

Subscribe to my blog at: http://www.surrogacyeggdonorblog.com/subscribe.html

 

Vatican Issues Statement on Embryos & IVF

The Vatican issued a document regarding the issues behind bioethics on Friday, explaining to Roman Catholics and non-Catholics alike the church’s stance on such issues.

To read the New York Times article regarding the document please go to: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/13/world/europe/13vatican.html?_r=1&ref=policy

For the actual document please go to: http://www.usccb.org/comm/Dignitaspersonae/Dignitas_Personae.pdf 

What are your thoughts?

Theresa M. Erickson, Esq.
Conceptual Options, Center for Surrogacy and Egg Donation

www.ConceptualOptions.com

Leftover Embryos - What Shall You Do With Them?

Duke University Medical Center released a new study this week regarding embryo donation for research. They found in their study that more than 41% of patients who had finished fertility treatments and had leftover embryos would rather donate them to research than to another couple.

These findings are significant considering that the national debate regarding research using stem cells and embryos is highly controversial. However, the patients that said they would donate their excess embryos to research said that they would rather donate to research because they did not want the embryos to become children in families other than their own.

Additionally, these patients also said that donating the excess embryos to research was easier than simply destroying the embryos outright. Could this mean that the nation’s feelings about stem cell and embryo research are changing?

Click Here for Complete Article

Study Regarding Paternal Age Affecting Embryo Quality & Implantation

The Reproductive Bio Medicine journal recently published a huge study for the area of Assisted Reproductive Technologies. This study was conducted by a group of Spanish researchers and is considered to be the largest and most comprehensive study regarding the effect of male aging and its effect on assisted reproductive technologies.

Following their extensive research, they found that male aging does not have any negative impact on the resulting embryo quality or the implantation rate for these resulting embryos. This is a very interesting study considering that it was believed that like female aging, male aging also had an effect on embryos and their implantation rate when using Assisted Reproductive Technologies.

However, it would be interesting to look at this study more closely and to see exactly what their findings were to compare to the same results from a study based upon female again and its effect on ART. What are your thoughts?

Click Here for Complete Article

ASRM - Single Embryo Transfers in the US?

At the ASRM’s annual meeting in San Francisco this year most of the speakers and participants spoke about the push towards only implanting one embryo at a time within the US, which is the standard throughout Europe.

However, some practitioners warned that this should only be pushed, as ASRM recommends, for patients under the age of 35 who have not had a failed previous cycle of IVF. If this was adopted in the US it is believed that it would save a total of $1 billion in healthcare costs from the adverse affects of multiple pregnancies.

However, it could also cost patients an extra $100 million to achieve the same pregnancy rates as with the multiple embryo transfer. Which is better? What are your thoughts?

Click Here for the Complete Article

Embryos, embryos and more embryos

As the LA Times recently reported deciding what to do with excess embryos is a daunting task for many individuals and couples who have gone through fertility treatments and achieved a healthy pregnancy.

Additionally, if you decide to donate your cryopreserved embryos to research it is often a lot easier said than done, especially in states that do not allow embryos to be used in medical research. However, even if you are donating your embryos in a state that allows embryos to be used for research it is still a daunting task with a lot of paperwork that needs to be completed.

Because of all of the paperwork many clinics report that couples and/or individuals are more likely to discard their excess embryos because that is the “easier” option. Yet, for some donating or discarding is not even an option because they feel that they would be donating or discarding a “child,” which, if that is your belief, only makes this decision all the more difficult.

However, if these embryos were to be donated to science there are numerous maladies that are being researched to find a cure for and these embryos could help find those cures.

Click Here for Complete Article

Using Frozen Embryos

Intended Parents often have questions about what happen if the first "fresh" attempt doesn't work.  Most of the time, the back-up plan is to use frozen embryos for subsequent cycles.  This is true whether the embryos are being placed in the Intended Mother or in a Surrogate.

The European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology has recently completed a study that indicates that children born from frozen embryos do better and have a higher birth weight than children born from a fresh transfer.

The study evaluated babies born during the years 1995 - 2006.  The study included 1,267 children born from Frozen Embryos and 17,857 babies born after normal IVF with fresh embryos.  The results of the study showed that children who came from frozen embryos had higher birth weights, longer pregnancies, and less pre-term births.  There was no difference int he rate of birth defects whether the children came from frozen embryos or fresh embryos. 

It is unclear why the frozen embryo children did better than their fresh embryo counterparts.  One suggestion is that "weaker embryos" may have been weeded out by the freeze thaw process, leaving only the healthiest embryos to produce a pregnancy. 

So if your initial attempt doesn't work, don't get discouraged.  There is proof that the frozen embryos have just as good of a chance of being the child you have always wanted.