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.
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...
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.
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.
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.