General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSofía Vergara’s Ex-Fiancé: Our Frozen Embryos Have a Right to Live
When we create embryos for the purpose of life, should we not define them as life, rather than as property? Does one persons desire to avoid biological parenthood (free of any legal obligations) outweigh anothers religious beliefs in the sanctity of life and desire to be a parent? A woman is entitled to bring a pregnancy to term even if the man objects. Shouldnt a man who is willing to take on all parental responsibilities be similarly entitled to bring his embryos to term even if the woman objects? These are issues that, unlike abortion, have nothing to do with the rights over ones own body, and everything to do with a parents right to protect the life of his or her unborn child.
In 2013, Sofía and I agreed to try to use in vitro fertilization and a surrogate to have children. We signed a form stating that any embryos created through the process could be brought to term only with both parties consent. The form did not specify as California law requires what would happen if we separated. I am asking to have it voided.
My lawyers have identified 10 other cases in the United States in which a parent tried to have a fertilized, frozen embryo taken to term against the wishes of an opposing parent. In eight of those cases, the parent seeking custody lost. In the other two cases, one in Pennsylvania and one in Illinois, a woman was awarded custody of fertilized embryos over the mans objections. In both cases, the woman had undergone chemotherapy treatment and the embryos were her last chance to have a biological child; judges ruled that the womans interest in becoming a parent outweighed the mans interest in not becoming a parent. In the Illinois case (now on appeal), the judge found that the form the couple signed was not the binding contract, and instead enforced a verbal promise the man made to help the woman have children.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/30/opinion/sofiavergaras-ex-fiance-our-frozen-embryos-have-a-right-to-live.html?_r=0
No way in hell should he be able to sue for custody for embryo's. He thinks they are life and that not using them is tantamount to killing them.
Evergreen Emerald
(13,070 posts)I do not believe a word he said.
marym625
(17,997 posts)We can maybe discuss it. Until then, he should stfu.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Both parties consent. Why is there a question?
blm
(113,095 posts)in just about everything.
They are shameless. He probably wants to run for office AGAIN and this will help create an instant base for him.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)that it didn't include some additional clause that is 'required by California law'.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)There is no legal status given to boyfriend-girlfriend.
bananas
(27,509 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)That is so wrong and complete crap.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Say that the relationship has any legal status.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)Why would anyone think that something would change if you separated if there was no separate clause stipulating such? Barring specific language that specifies that something changes after a separation, wouldn't the default assumption under law be that the language that already exists in the contract be what is followed?
And was it 'California law' at the time the contract was drawn up? If so, were they using 'Bob's House of IVF', where they don't actually draw up forms that match what is 'legal in California'?
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)onecaliberal
(32,899 posts)What doesn't he get about both people must agree. I wouldn't doubt if he was responsive for making this public.
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)And super creepy. Can he not get over their breakup? He can always use an egg donor & surrogate if he must have biologically his own children. Sounds like he's purposefully trying to keep his ex in his life. Gross
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)If these frozen embryos are thawed out, implanted and brought to term, Ms. Vergara will be legally required to pay child support - and considering that she's a famous and well-paid Star of Stage and Screen, the amount required will be very high.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)lame54
(35,325 posts)Seems that nobody agrees with this guy
Some were pissed the times gave him a platform
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)something about "This is an ACTUAL HUMAN BEING, not just 'potential for life'"
I want to reply with - "Wow, I didn't realize an ACTUAL HUMAN BEING could live in a fucking freezer for so long!"
But I won't. I'll just use this post as a surrogate.
And yeah, I have no romanticized notions about the NYT but the fact that they printed this still surprises the hell outta me. What a crappy load of crap.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)If he wants a child he needs to move on and find someone who wants to have them with him.
951-Riverside
(7,234 posts)GET A JOB YOU WORTHLESS MOOCHER AND STOP TRYING TO HUSTLE THIS WOMAN FOR MORE MONEY!
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)I think this is more about control not money
boston bean
(36,223 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I dont think it stands a chance of moving anywhere close to far enough up the legal food chain to get to where someone might even rule on his attempt to assert that frozen embryo = "baby"
He might get some play on religious right radio and websites, doubtful much else.
frazzled
(18,402 posts)I at first thought he was in it for the money, too (Sofia Vergara's embryos might go for big bucks on the market, I should think). But then I looked this guy up:
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0005161/bio
To top it off, his cousin is Edgar Bronfman Jr. of Seagrams Universal. The Loebs and the Bronfman's? I don't think this guy is needing to make money. He's just wrong. Plain and simple.
jmowreader
(50,562 posts)The super-rich believe that all money belongs to them.
UTUSN
(70,744 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 30, 2015, 05:40 PM - Edit history (1)
Wants to be a sweetheart of the anti-abortionists on the front cover of the gossip magazines, standing beside a surrogate mom as narcissistic as he is, them smiling like crocodiles, holding the babies a celebrity biological mom refused him.
SUPER FUCKING CREEPY MIND FUCK RAPIST!!!
Xithras
(16,191 posts)The two of them created two pieces of property together. They have a contract saying that the property will be destroyed if they don't both agree to keep them. He wants to keep them, she doesn't.
Seems like a fairly straightforward property dispute to me. Unless he can show that the contract was somehow invalid or violated state law, she is going to win.
Retrograde
(10,158 posts)He can't get what he wants, so he somehow gets a major newspaper to give him space on its op-ed page to whine, because, after all, it's All About Him. His father will never get to see his grandchildren? Boo hoo: if it's that important I'm sure there are plenty of women around who can give him what he wants.
wheniwasincongress
(1,307 posts)Does he not masturbate? Does he believe that sperm wasted are potential children, killed?
LeftyMom
(49,212 posts)I don't think "because Catholicism" is a reason to get to thaw out the embryos you made with your not-wife. The Catholic church is pretty explicit about what they do and don't want you to do on the reproductive front, and IVF and spawning with someone other than your spouse are pretty high on the list of those things you can't do.