A ruling out of Missouri’s Court of Appeals found that frozen embryos have the same rights as any other marital property, but not children. The case was the result of a woman who wanted to use frozen embryos from her and her ex-husband against his wishes.
Corporations are still people under the eyes of justice, but embryos are not, according to a ruling out of Kansas City’s Court of Appeals. This will come as bad news to Jalesia “Jasha”McQueen, 44, and as great news to her ex-husband, Justin Gadberry, 34.
The couple froze several embryos in 2007, CBS News reported. Some were used and resulted in the couple having twins, but when their 2010 separation brought the issue to the courts. McQueen hoped to use the remaining embryos to have more children, but Gadberry was not interested.
The 2-1 ruling from the Court of Appeals favored Gadberry’s desired outcome, but the justices responsible for it acknowledged that the case had touched on sensitive issues over unborn personhood. Appeals Judge Robert Clayton III said the court “recognizes the sensitive nature of this case and the differing personal beliefs it evokes – ethical, religious and philosophical – pertaining to scientific advancements in reproductive technology, procreation choice, and the age-old and disputed question of when life begins.”
However, in Clayton’s opinion, the court was not ruling on where or when life begins. He wrote, “We are only required to decide whether frozen pre-embryos have the legal status of children under our dissolution of marriage statutes.”
By RT News
Full report at RT News