{"id":30185,"date":"2024-02-25T18:58:55","date_gmt":"2024-02-26T00:58:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/johnbeckett\/?p=30185"},"modified":"2024-02-25T18:58:55","modified_gmt":"2024-02-26T00:58:55","slug":"the-alabama-ivf-ruling-one-more-step-toward-theocracy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/johnbeckett\/2024\/02\/the-alabama-ivf-ruling-one-more-step-toward-theocracy.html","title":{"rendered":"The Alabama IVF Ruling: One More Step Toward Theocracy"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>
On February 16 the Alabama State Supreme Court ruled that fertilized eggs are persons, calling them \u201cextrauterine children.\u201d This allows would-be parents to sue an in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinic for wrongful death when frozen embryos are accidentally destroyed (which was the subject of the case before the court). It has the side effect of shutting down IVF treatments in Alabama (including those already in progress) as clinics try to protect themselves from lawsuits and potential prosecution.<\/p>\n
I can\u2019t say I was surprised by the ruling. A significant proportion of the anti-choice \/ pro-forced birth movement is opposed to IVF, and the 2022 Dobbs<\/em> ruling<\/a> that overturned Roe v. Wade<\/em> allowed state courts and legislatures to decide these extremely personal choices that properly belong to individuals.<\/p>\n
As I often do with important court cases, I read the ruling<\/a>. I\u2019m not a lawyer, but most court rulings \u2013 especially at the higher levels \u2013 are fairly easy to follow, if you don\u2019t mind wading through dozens and sometimes hundreds of pages of precedents and legal reasoning. I want to know not just what the court ruled, but why they ruled that way \u2013 and what it\u2019s likely to mean going forward. Most times I respect the reasoning even if I disagree with the conclusions of the court.<\/p>\n
Not so in this ruling.<\/p>\n
<\/a><\/p>\n