SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
A court battle between a divorced couple over the future of their frozen embryos began Monday with an attorney for the former husband accusing the woman of using the dispute to get money.
Dr. Mimi Lee, 46, a pianist and part-time anesthesiologist, married Stephen Findley, a wealthy executive, five years ago. Shortly before the wedding, Lee learned she had breast cancer.
Unsure whether the disease would make it impossible for her to have children, the couple went to a fertility center, where Lee's eggs and Findley's sperm created five embryos, now frozen.
Findley filed for divorce two years ago and wants the embryos destroyed. Lee, now infertile, wants to implant the embryos into a surrogate and have a baby. Without the embryos, she will never have a child who shares her genes.
If the embryos are implanted and carry to term, the ex-husband becomes a father without consent. If the embryos are destroyed, the ex-wife is denied the deep need to procreate. The embryos themselves have issues either way. Modern biomedical ethics are complex.
Original Submission
(Score: 4, Informative) by pinchy on Wednesday July 15 2015, @09:57PM
and
(Score: 5, Insightful) by tangomargarine on Wednesday July 15 2015, @11:16PM
Well then obviously the solution is for Lee to murder Findley.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by scruffybeard on Thursday July 16 2015, @01:18AM
But Whittier Law School’s Daar said that waiver “has no legal meaning.”
I agree 100%. Seeing how she has already signed an agreement to destroy the embryos in the case of a divorce, why should anyone believe her when she says she would release him from child support.
(Score: 5, Informative) by sjames on Thursday July 16 2015, @01:44AM
Beyond that, there has been a case where a woman went on public assistance and the state sued the sperm donor against the wishes of the mother and of the signed agreement that he would have no paternal rights of responsibilities.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by choose another one on Thursday July 16 2015, @09:11AM
Easy solution to the child support issue is for her to setup a court controlled trust fund that will pay her support, in the event that any claim is made against the father, the fund goes to him, so he can pay support from it. If she hasn't got the money up front then the fund could be setup by insuring her income and her life in some way, I guess.
If she doesn't have the money and can't get life/health/income insurance (she has already had cancer...) then that should be a big clue to her that she shouldn't be doing this.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by CirclesInSand on Thursday July 16 2015, @03:32AM
So she agreed to destroy the embryos, but now has a lawyer trying to get her out of that agreement.
Now afterwords, she is offering to agree to waive child support. Would you trust this second offer?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 16 2015, @10:15PM
Findley is just being a dick. He is almost guaranteed that he will not have to pay child support, even without his ex-wife's consent. For starters, even if they were still together, they probably would have to adopt their own child. (Depending on the jurisdiction, of course) And if they were not found fit, the surrogate could end up with the child. With Findley out of the picture, Lee would adopt her own child by herself, and since she adopted while she was single, Findley is off the hook.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 18 2015, @11:40AM
Now IANAL, but you said "even if they were still together, they probably would have to adopt their own child. (Depending on the jurisdiction, of course)" as she would be using a surrogate, however they key words are "Depending on the jurisdiction". Do you not think as Lee so desperately wants to have her own child she might ensure the surrogacy happens in a jurisdiction where that won't be an issue for her?