IVF embryos are people too

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

Wouldn’t that be transporting kidnapped children over state lines?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

Wouldn’t that be transporting kidnapped children over state lines?

How is it kidnapping if the parents are the ones transporting or arranging transport?

[Anonymous]

But obviously what a disaster all around. This really stinks for Alabama and any other state that decides the same. Disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

It is an embryo transfer. Not implantation. You transfer the embryo to the uterus and hope it implants.
And my concern, as an IVF veteran, is more for the women who are in the middle of egg retrieval cycles at this clinic right now. The frozen embryos can wait; egg retrieval is time critical, and once you start that process with the stim meds, you can't just put it all on hold . These women with canceled retrieval cycles will have to start from scratch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

It is an embryo transfer. Not implantation. You transfer the embryo to the uterus and hope it implants.
And my concern, as an IVF veteran, is more for the women who are in the middle of egg retrieval cycles at this clinic right now. The frozen embryos can wait; egg retrieval is time critical, and once you start that process with the stim meds, you can't just put it all on hold . These women with canceled retrieval cycles will have to start from scratch.

More heartache for them. Terrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

It is an embryo transfer. Not implantation. You transfer the embryo to the uterus and hope it implants.
And my concern, as an IVF veteran, is more for the women who are in the middle of egg retrieval cycles at this clinic right now. The frozen embryos can wait; egg retrieval is time critical, and once you start that process with the stim meds, you can't just put it all on hold . These women with canceled retrieval cycles will have to start from scratch.

More heartache for them. Terrible.

Do they have a contract with the health system? Can they sue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

It is an embryo transfer. Not implantation. You transfer the embryo to the uterus and hope it implants.
And my concern, as an IVF veteran, is more for the women who are in the middle of egg retrieval cycles at this clinic right now. The frozen embryos can wait; egg retrieval is time critical, and once you start that process with the stim meds, you can't just put it all on hold . These women with canceled retrieval cycles will have to start from scratch.

More heartache for them. Terrible.

Do they have a contract with the health system? Can they sue?

Guessing the contract was signed before this new ruling changed the laws so what does that mean?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel like more than a few people need to retake high school biology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

It is an embryo transfer. Not implantation. You transfer the embryo to the uterus and hope it implants.
And my concern, as an IVF veteran, is more for the women who are in the middle of egg retrieval cycles at this clinic right now. The frozen embryos can wait; egg retrieval is time critical, and once you start that process with the stim meds, you can't just put it all on hold . These women with canceled retrieval cycles will have to start from scratch.

More heartache for them. Terrible.

Do they have a contract with the health system? Can they sue?

Guessing the contract was signed before this new ruling changed the laws so what does that mean?

And there are never any guarantees with IVF. I was in the middle of it in NYC on 9 11. So many cancelled cycles obviously. Who are you gong to sue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

It is an embryo transfer. Not implantation. You transfer the embryo to the uterus and hope it implants.
And my concern, as an IVF veteran, is more for the women who are in the middle of egg retrieval cycles at this clinic right now. The frozen embryos can wait; egg retrieval is time critical, and once you start that process with the stim meds, you can't just put it all on hold . These women with canceled retrieval cycles will have to start from scratch.

More heartache for them. Terrible.

Do they have a contract with the health system? Can they sue?

Guessing the contract was signed before this new ruling changed the laws so what does that mean?

And there are never any guarantees with IVF. I was in the middle of it in NYC on 9 11. So many cancelled cycles obviously. Who are you gong to sue?

I don’t know. But I can imagine there is a wealthy Alabama couple or two who just got some bad news and are on the phone with a lawyer right now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But obviously what a disaster all around. This really stinks for Alabama and any other state that decides the same. Disaster.

Nah, it is what they voted for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

It is an embryo transfer. Not implantation. You transfer the embryo to the uterus and hope it implants.
And my concern, as an IVF veteran, is more for the women who are in the middle of egg retrieval cycles at this clinic right now. The frozen embryos can wait; egg retrieval is time critical, and once you start that process with the stim meds, you can't just put it all on hold . These women with canceled retrieval cycles will have to start from scratch.

More heartache for them. Terrible.

Do they have a contract with the health system? Can they sue?

Guessing the contract was signed before this new ruling changed the laws so what does that mean?

And there are never any guarantees with IVF. I was in the middle of it in NYC on 9 11. So many cancelled cycles obviously. Who are you gong to sue?

I don’t know. But I can imagine there is a wealthy Alabama couple or two who just got some bad news and are on the phone with a lawyer right now.

Wealthy Alabama couples will just go to another state to get access. Who cares about the rest?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So can patients sue the health system halting the procedures for withholding their children from them? I’m so confused.

If the embryos are people/children and the parents have not been deemed unfit to raise them…How is that going to work? Like what if you have viable embryos and you’re getting ready to have them implanted but now can’t. How is that legal.

Implant them yourself I guess if you want to take the risk. No MD is going to risk prosecution to help you...that is asking too much.

Yeah, I understand that but I still don’t get how it’s legal to withhold children from their mothers given this new ruling. I understand the health systems decision to halt, but I feel like now there has been a can of worms opened. If we deemed that those embryos are people I understand not wanting to risk prosecution, but I also understand not just being able to keep them there.

How are they not damned if they do and damned if they don’t?

I would guess this clinic will permanently halt IVF procedures and try to transfer this frozen depository of embryos to some other entity or basically just keep them frozen for eternity. If the frozen embryo can be transferred to a clinic in a state where IVF is protected, perhaps the couple could have an implantation procedure in that state.

It is an embryo transfer. Not implantation. You transfer the embryo to the uterus and hope it implants.
And my concern, as an IVF veteran, is more for the women who are in the middle of egg retrieval cycles at this clinic right now. The frozen embryos can wait; egg retrieval is time critical, and once you start that process with the stim meds, you can't just put it all on hold . These women with canceled retrieval cycles will have to start from scratch.

More heartache for them. Terrible.

Do they have a contract with the health system? Can they sue?

Guessing the contract was signed before this new ruling changed the laws so what does that mean?

And there are never any guarantees with IVF. I was in the middle of it in NYC on 9 11. So many cancelled cycles obviously. Who are you gong to sue?

I don’t know. But I can imagine there is a wealthy Alabama couple or two who just got some bad news and are on the phone with a lawyer right now.

Wealthy Alabama couples will just go to another state to get access. Who cares about the rest?

Not if their eggs are in limbo or she is mid cycle on the harvesting drugs.

[Anonymous]