It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Actress Faces Lawsuit 'From Own Embryos'

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 10:46 AM
link   
Actress Sofia Vergara is facing the lawsuit from her two stored embryos , Emma and Isabella , on the grounds they're being deprived of their inheritance from a trust by not being born.

The lawsuit is being brought on behalf of the Embryos by a trustee of the fund which was set up in Louisiana.

Ms Vergara, 44, and Mr Loeb, a 41-year-old businessman, created the embryos at a California clinic through in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) in 2013. A contract signed at the time is reported to have stipulated that neither partner could do anything with the embryos without the other's consent. Ms Vergara, according the suit, is alleged to be refusing to allow them to be implanted in a surrogate mother.
Mr Loeb's legal team allege that both Ms Vergara and Mr Loeb went into the IVF process on the understanding that the embryos would be brought to term.
www.bbc.co.uk...


Aside from the WTF factor I think this is a sad case , hope they get it sorted out to everybody's relative satisfaction although I feel it will be the Embryos who come out the losers here.




posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   
If these embryos have the right to be born what does this do to abortion rights?

Hopefully no judge will waste time hearing this one.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
If these embryos have the right to be born what does this do to abortion rights?

Hopefully no judge will waste time hearing this one.

Yeah, this could create a sticky situation.

If the case isn't summarily dismissed, an "embryo" could have a right to life. That ruling would cascade all the way up the developmental process.

Further, that would also, possibly, bring into play "father's rights" with regards to abortion, given a "clause" in the agreement in the case stating to the effect of requiring consent of both parents.




edit on 8-12-2016 by paradoxious because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Perhaps when every walking, talking child is receiving the highest quality education, never going hungry, and absolutely never finds themselves in a bad foster home or with biological parents who have all the moral fortitude of a professional torturer, we should concern ourselves with the rights of what are, at this point, parasites with delusions of grandeur?

Just a thought.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

That is an odd case. I think it can be inferred that being 'brought to term' would be within Sofia Vergara and no one else.
If she doesn't agree to them being implanted in another person, the contract already states nothing is to happen.

This will probably be dismissed as soon as it gets to court.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 11:20 AM
link   
A friend of mine, who is a chemical engineer, got a job several years ago that involved working with chemicals that could possibly damage his sperm. One of the company benefits was that they would pay to have his sperm frozen, so that if there ever was an issue him and his wife could still have children. A few years later he gets divorced. His Ex wasn't happy with the settlement, so she forged his signature on some paperwork and had herself artificially inseminated. After the baby was born she sues him for child support and he has to pay.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:16 PM
link   
embryos aren`t U.S. citizens therefore they have no rights under the constitution.
one of the criteria for being a U.S. citizen is that you have to be born in the U.S., the keyword being BORN.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

While I starred you because I agree, allow me to pose another view-

Isn't a right to life a basic human right, regardless of country?



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Gotta give them credit for trying something new.

Legally only Sofia can do anything with them so that doesn't leave many options.

It could actually strengthen the choice argument.
If we're not willing to force someone into pregnancy in this case (which will surely be the result), then forcing pregnancies in other cases could be seen as equally wrong.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

Just wait until someones tries to pull this nonsense with a sperm bank.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
a reply to: gortex

Gotta give them credit for trying something new.

Legally only Sofia can do anything with them so that doesn't leave many options.

It could actually strengthen the choice argument.
If we're not willing to force someone into pregnancy in this case (which will surely be the result), then forcing pregnancies in other cases could be seen as equally wrong.



Except no one is trying to force her to be pregnant. Her partner wants the children they agreed to together that his sperm helped create the embryos for. The pregnancy would be via surrogate, not Vergara.

I'm not saying he should necessarily get his wish, but at the same time, if he were Vergara would this case be happening or would he be able to get pregnant with those embryos without question?

This sort of highlights the lack of rights fathers have even though no woman can get pregnant without their sperm.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Chickensalad

I certainly believe so but we have to draw the line somewhere,after being physically born is as a good a place to draw the line as anywhere.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: gortex

Perhaps when every walking, talking child is receiving the highest quality education, never going hungry, and absolutely never finds themselves in a bad foster home or with biological parents who have all the moral fortitude of a professional torturer, we should concern ourselves with the rights of what are, at this point, parasites with delusions of grandeur?

Just a thought.


This is just one example, but the example where I finally have to go ahead and praise your way with words. Simply awesome TrueBrit.



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 09:47 PM
link   
well all you gotta do is look at the guys name. lmfao. he got himself a fancy lawyer, and said 'i want some of that modern family money'



posted on Dec, 8 2016 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

That's a utopic vision.. while one that would make feel good feelings about saving potential life from suffering, who are we to decide who gets to join us in this existence, and fight the good fight....

Life is a struggle.... the decision on who gets to join that struggle surely cannot reside in the folks who are struggling themselves...

An opposing thought... something to think about... I know I don't have all the answers, I just don't feel that I have that level of consciousness to decide who lives or who doesn't... even if it's in a test tube..

That kinda creeps me out to be honest... YMMV




top topics



 
6

log in

join