After a ruling in favor of the Plaintiffs on Feb. 16, 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court decided that ex-utero embryos are considered people and deserving of personhood. This decision comes as a surprise to many politicians and citizens alike as it goes one step further than the Supreme Court overturning of Roe V. Wade in 2022.
For many informed and passionate voters and citizens, it can still be challenging to navigate the convoluted legal articles. So, allow me to summarize…Â
overview
An Alabama fertility clinic gave three couples IVF treatments in which they took fertilized eggs and then artificially inseminated the three women to get pregnant. The IVF worked and all three women were pregnant and happy with the results, however, fertility clinics always take more than one egg in case the first round does not take, so there were additional embryos frozen in a cryo machine in the lab to be used later if necessary. The Alabama court case was due to a scientist grabbing the tray of frozen embryos, burning himself, and subsequently dropping the tray —essentially destroying the viable embryos. The plaintiffs (all three couples) are claiming that the scientist killed their children since the embryos were fertilized.Â
The outcome of this case shocked the country and raised questions for further healthcare professionals and reproductive rights in the United States. The plaintiff’s claim is that the case falls under the Alabama statute Wrongful Death of a Minor Act which was thrown out at the trial court level as the judge ruled against the case stating that embryos were only given personhood when in utero.Â
This did not deter the plaintiffs as they appealed the case and brought it to the state Supreme Court in an effort to have their case reheard at a higher level, which was successful as the Alabama Supreme Court ruled in their favor, citing: “to all unborn children without limitation. And that includes unborn children who are not located in utero at the time they are killed.”Â
implications
Prior to this ruling, the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act was initially brought into law in the 19th century — predating IVF by hundreds of years — and had never been used in connection with artificial insemination. This ruling has immediately changed the state healthcare system in the coming weeks as two out of eight Alabama fertility clinics have now paused their treatments out of real concern for their legal liability.Â
What does this mean for future fertility clinics? It’s hard to determine what exactly will occur next, but this case is the first major legal change in a post-Roe V. Wade (2022) reversal world. It shows how the country can continue to reverse progressive eugenics laws. In the state of Alabama, the abortion ban that has been in effect since 2019 specifically says that personhood begins with a fertilized embryo in utero, so the ruling on this case could change the wording or the way IVF is viewed in the state going forward.Â
Other states have had a large amount of pushback and fear after the ruling. Some are even protesting the decision and demanding their own state representatives do not change any legislation surrounding IVF or reproductive health matters.Â
The change in law would have to come from the legislative branch instead of the judicial branch, as was the case with this. But in all likelihood, there won’t be a written change to fertility treatments in the near future based on this case alone.Â