Texas Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Embryos
The Case of Roman Vs. Roman
In the Chicago Tribune, dated June 10, 2007, it was reported by Jim Vertuno of the Associated Press, that the top court in Texas will, of necessity, be deciding the fate of embryos belonging to Augusta and Randy Roman.
Because of fertility problems, a clinic had extracted Augusta Roman's eggs and fertilized them with her then-husband Randy's sperm but in April 2002, just before the eggs were to be implanted in her, he announced he "couldn't go through with it," citing marriage problems. The embryos were frozen, in the hopes that the couple could sort their differences out, but they decided to end the marriage.
The two parties bitterly disagree on the what should be done with these embryos. Augusta, 45, wants to keep them, saying, "These are my children. This is my last chance at being a biological mom." Randy bitterly opposes keeping them. He believes that "the embryos were meant for use only within the marriage."
Because they couldn't agree on the fate of their embryos, the Houston trial court became involved. The court "ordered the embryos turned over to Augusta." Randy, however, appealed the courts decision and won.
The Texas Supreme Court is considering one key piece of evidence. Both signed a form that said the embryos would be discarded in the event of a divorce.
Randy fully believes this form is binding but Augusta's attorney, Becky Reitz, says her client "signed it believing she would get to try embryo implantation at least once."
In similar cases, six states as well as the European Court of Human Rights "have generally upheld the rights of the ex-spouse who does not want to procreate," said David Meyer, an expert in family and constitutional law at the University of Illinois.
Associated Press, Embryo custody fight tests Texas family law, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-embryo10_bdjun10,1,2017005.story
Published by Judith Bierman
I live in the deep northwoods of Wisconsin I have a beautiful granddaughter who is three and a sweet grandson, age two. I write when I can, which is rather limited right now due to having leukemia. View profile
- Supreme Court Rejects Execution of Mentally Retarded Killer The Supreme Court blocked the execution of Panetti V. Quaterman, a mentally retarded killer in Texas on the grounds that the lower court failed to take into consideration the mounting psychiatric evidence supported by...
- Constitutional Issues in Texas Polygamy Raid In The United States, you are either guilty or you are not. When you havent even been charged with a crime, how can courts maintain jurisdiction over you?
- Alberto Gonzales: Supreme Court Injustice? Some think that Alberto Gonzales is a likely candidate to succeed Sandra Day O'Connor on the US Supreme Court. But is he the kind of person who should be entrusted with lifelong responsibility for interpreting our law...
- Death Row Decision: U.S. Supreme Court Vs. International Court An International Court ruled that a murderer on death row in Texas should be extradited to his native country that has no death penalty. The U.S. Supreme Court denied his extradition. Good.
- The Legality of the Death Penalty and the Supreme Court has has the Supreme Court dealt with the issue
- Morals on Fertility: Infertile Woman Must Destroy Own Embryos After Disagreement w...
- Texas Supreme Court Rules FLDS Children to Be Returned to Parents
- Religious Freedom Law Signed by Then Governor George Bush to Be Interpreted by Tex...
- Supreme Court Hears Arguments to Determine State Sovereignty Over International Tr...
- In Rare Decision, Supreme Court Expressly Overruled an Earlier Case in Lawrence V....
- Supreme Court Deals Blow to Student's Rights to Free Speech
- Important Supreme Court Cases
|
|
- Who will speak in behalf of the embryos?
2 Comments
Post a CommentAmen Kathy!
I hadn't heard about this particular story before, but I could see something like this coming. Our country (and world) is fast moving toward more and more of this type of "playing God". We think we can do any weird or immoral act and call it science or free speech, or our choice. Instead of coming up with a viable solution to a problem, we only make a way to go on to another that is more confusing. I think Judy did a great job in laying out the facts and making the story clear for anyone who is interested in this subject.