What does he want: IVF interruptus?

| 1 Comment

On one hand, this ruling means that more "leftover" embryos in in-vitro cases will be snuffed. On the other hand, if it could help people recognize that IVF is a bad thing in the first place, it isn't a total loss.

Donum Vitae says:

The transmission of human life is entrusted by nature to a personal and conscious act and as such is subject to the all-holy laws of God: immutable and inviolable laws which must be recognized and observed. For this reason one cannot use means and follow methods which could be licit in the transmission of the life of plants and animals."
So, buddy, as long as you don't put any embryos on deposit at the IVF bank, you can be sure your ex-wife isn't going to surprise you by taking 'em out.

1 Comment

The man had absolutely no right to sue, since the embryo had already been conceived. I think that a bunch of lawyers should be given the right to sue all IVF parents on behalf of frozen and "discarded" embryos.

What? Who?

On life and living in communion with the Catholic Church.

Richard Chonak

John Schultz


You write, we post
unless you state otherwise.

Archives

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Richard Chonak published on January 31, 2004 10:56 AM.

Let's read David Frum's email together was the previous entry in this blog.

Equal Time for Dean is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.