LePage v. Center for Reproductive Medicine

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
LePage v. Center for Reproductive Medicine
CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
Full case nameJames LePage, Emily LePage, William Tripp Fonde, and Caroline Fonde v. The Center for Reproductive Medicine, P.C. and Mobile Infirmary Association d/b/a Mobile Infirmary Medical Center
Verdict8-1[1]
Citation(s)SC-2022-0515

James LePage, et al. v. The Center for Reproductive Medicine and Mobile Infirmary Association[a] is a 2024 Alabama Supreme Court case in which the court held that frozen embryos should be considered as living beings, allowing for in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics to be held liable for the accidental loss of embryos under Alabama's Wrongful Death of a Minor law.

The ruling was highly criticized from political speakers on both sides of the spectrum, particularly in the wake of the overturning of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court two years earlier. Several IVF clinics in the state suspended operations following the ruling.

Background

Embryo destruction incident

Per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about 1 in 5 people are unable to get pregnant after a year of trying, with a recent survey reporting that 42% of all American adults indicated they have used or know someone who used fertility treatments.[3] In in vitro fertilization (IVF) a fertilized egg can be manufactured in a lab and cultivated for about five or six days to create a blastocyst that is then flash frozen with liquid nitrogen.[4] One round of IVF in Alabama can cost between $15,000 to $25,000.[5]

In 2020, a patient at the Center for Reproductive Medicine in Mobile, Alabama improperly accessed the cryogenic freezer where frozen embryos were stored, removing and dropping them on the floor after their hands suffered from cold burns.[6] Four parents—James and Emily LePage and Felicia and Scott Aysenne—sued against the Center for Reproductive Medicine, with William Tripp and Caroline Fonde serving as plaintiffs in LePage's lawsuit.[7]

Lower court rulings

The Mobile Circuit Court ruled in favor of the defendants.[7][5]

Alabama Supreme Court

On February 20, 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that the state's Wrongful Death of a Minor Act covered frozen embryos, which allowed the case to return to the lower court to be ruled on the liability of the defendants.[7][8]

The ruling decision cited an 1872 Alabama state law that allowed for parents to sue over the death of a minor child, a right that applies to all unborn children regardless of their location. Therefore, if a frozen embryo is destroyed, those responsible could be sued under the Alabama Wrongful Death of a Minor law.[9] Justice Jay Mitchell wrote in the opinion that an unborn child is a child, without any exception based on developmental stage, physical location, or any other characteristics, concluding that nothing would therefore exclude unborn children located outside the uterus from the law.[10][11] Mitchell's opinion also referenced a 2018 amendment to the state constitution,[12] arguing that its approval showed that "the public policy of this state [is] to recognize and support the sanctity of unborn life and the rights of unborn children."[8]

Chief Justice Tom Parker wrote a concurring opinion to the ruling, citing the Bible's Book of Jeremiah and Book of Genesis; the Sixth Commandment; the Manhattan Declaration; as well as Christian theologians such as Thomas Aquinas and John Calvin.[13][14][15][16] Parker stated:

In summary, the theologically based view of the sanctity of life adopted by the People of Alabama encompasses the following: (1) God made every person in His image; (2) each person therefore has a value that far exceeds the ability of human beings to calculate; and (3) human life cannot be wrongfully destroyed without incurring the wrath of a holy God, who views the destruction of His image as an affront to Himself.[13]

Alabama's Human Life Protection Act, which states that it is a felony for a doctor to perform any type of abortion, was discussed by Justice Brady E. Mendheim in an opinion concurring with the result of the ruling decision.[16][17]

Impact

In vitro fertilization access

Following the Alabama Supreme Court's ruling, the University of Alabama at Birmingham announced that it was pausing in vitro fertilization treatments.[18] Two other IVF clinics also paused treatments following the ruling.[8] Alabama's attorney general Steve Marshall that he "has no intention of using the recent Alabama Supreme Court decision as a basis for prosecuting IVF families or providers."[19] The next day, an explosive device was detonated outside of Marshall's office in Montgomery, although no one was harmed in the incident.[20]

State lawmakers from both political parties reacted the same week to protect IVF. A bill with bipartisan support and backing from Alabama's governor Kay Ivey was introduced that "would provide that any fertilized human egg or human embryo that exists outside of a human uterus is not considered an unborn child or human being for any purpose under state law" and allow IVF clinics to proceed as normal.[21][22] On February 29, 2024, the two houses of the Alabama legislature passed similar bills, stating "no action, suit, or criminal prosecution for the damage to or death of an embryo shall be brought or maintained against any individual or entity when providing or receiving goods or services related to in vitro fertilization."[23] Ivey signed the law on March 6, 2024, with two of the IVF clinics stating they will immediately resume services.[24]

At the federal level, a bill called the Access to Family Building Act was introduced in both houses of Congress in January 2024, which would override any state law so as to offer additional protections to IVF clinics. The bill's co-sponsor Senator Tammy Duckworth urged action on the bill in light of the Alabama court ruling.[21] However, Senate Republicans blocked the bill during voting on February 28, 2024.[25]

According to David Schultz, professor of law at University of Minnesota, this ruling cannot be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, as the decision is solely an interpretation of Alabama state law. Schultz also argues that this ruling would have been possible prior to the overturning of federal abortion protection in the 2022 Dobbs decision, because it does not directly relate to abortion.[26]

2024 U.S. presidential election

The Alabama case was seen to have a potentially significant impact on the pending 2024 United States presidential election, following the U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade in the 2022 case Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. The Democratic party started to immediately add the issue of protecting IVF treatments to its campaign platform in addition to its fight to protect abortion and other womens' rights. President Joe Biden condemned the ruling, stating it was only possible due to the decision from Dobbs and that "the disregard for women's ability to make these decisions for themselves and their families is outrageous and unacceptable."[27][28][6] Vice President Kamala Harris said, "On the one hand, the proponents are saying that an individual doesn't have a right to end an unwanted pregnancy and, on the other hand, the individual does not have the right to start a family."[28][6]

Some members of the Republican party, already trying to push their stance on abortion to the background so as to draw votes from women and swing voters, were critical of the Alabama Supreme Court decision since it left no carve out to protect IVF.[28] [29] Former president Donald Trump, running in 2024 for a second term as president, stated that IVF should remain legal.[30] Nikki Haley, another Republican candidate, initially stated that "embryos are babies," but later said she would need to review the law, stating, "We don't want fertility treatments to shut down."[28] New Hampshire Governor Chris Sununu and Tennessee Governor Bill Lee also spoke out against the decision.[27] Other Republican leaders in the U.S. House of Representatives praised the decision, having previously backed a bill that would codify that life begins at conception.[31]

Parker's concurrence and Christian nationalism

Chief Justice Tom Parker's concurring opinion rested heavily on Christian principles, leading to concern about his overall approach to judiciary duties. The same day of the decision, an interview with Parker was released where he expressed his beliefs in Christian nationalism and support of the Seven Mountain Mandate. Parker said in this interview, "God created government, and the fact that we have let it go into the possession of others, it's heartbreaking. That's why he is calling and equipping people to step back into these mountains right now."[32]

Parker's comments, in addition to his judicial opinion, have led to concern about the push of Christian nationalism by conservative politicians and the Republican party, and the attempted weakening of the separation of church and state.[32][33][34]

Notes

  1. ^ Decided with Felicia Burdick-Aysenne and Scott Aysenne v. The Center for Reproductive Medicine and Mobile Infirmary Association.[2]

See also

References

  1. ^ Gunther, Brad (2024-02-16). "Alabama Supreme court rules in-vitro embryos are children". WPMI. Retrieved 2024-02-25.
  2. ^ Brown, Elizabeth (February 21, 2024). "Frozen Embryos Are Now Children Under Alabama Law". Reason. Retrieved February 23, 2024.
  3. ^ Moniuszko, Sara; Cohen, Paula (2024-02-21). "Alabama court ruled frozen embryos are children. Experts explain potential impacts to IVF treatment. - CBS News". www.cbsnews.com. Retrieved 2024-02-23.
  4. ^ Ungar, Laura (2024-02-22). "Alabama's frozen embryo ruling is now having its 1st effects | See what to expect". 6abc Philadelphia. Retrieved 2024-02-23.
  5. ^ a b Hitson, Hadley (February 22, 2024). "Women reconsider IVF plans as fertility practices across Alabama pause procedures". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2024-02-23.
  6. ^ a b c Rabin, Roni; Ghorayshi, Azeen (February 20, 2024). "Alabama Rules Frozen Embryos Are Children, Raising Questions About Fertility Care". The New York Times. Retrieved February 23, 2024.
  7. ^ a b c Hoffman, Jan (February 20, 2024). "Alabama Says Embryos in a Lab Are Children. What Are the Implications?". The New York Times. Retrieved February 23, 2024.
  8. ^ a b c Pierson, Brendan (February 23, 2024). "Explainer: Alabama's highest court ruled frozen embryos are people. What is next?". Reuters. Retrieved February 24, 2024.
  9. ^ Hitson, Hadley (February 22, 2024). "Women reconsider IVF plans as fertility practices across Alabama pause procedures". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2024-02-23.
  10. ^ Chandler, Kim (2024-02-20). "Warnings of the impact of fertility treatments in Alabama rush in after frozen embryo ruling". AP News. Retrieved 2024-02-23.
  11. ^ Moniuszko, Sara; Cohen, Paula (2024-02-21). "Alabama court ruled frozen embryos are children. Experts explain potential impacts to IVF treatment. - CBS News". www.cbsnews.com. Retrieved 2024-02-23.
  12. ^ Ravitz, Jessica (November 7, 2018). "Two states passed abortion amendments to their constitutions in the midterm. What does that mean?". CNN. Retrieved February 25, 2024.
  13. ^ a b Hughes, Trevor; Arshad, Minnah (February 22, 2024). "Alabama justice invoked 'the wrath of a holy God' in IVF opinion. Is that allowed?". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2024-02-23.
  14. ^ Hixenbaugh, Mike (February 22, 2024). "Alabama justice who ruled embryos are people says American law should be rooted in the Bible". NBC News. Retrieved February 22, 2024.
  15. ^ Smith, Peter; Stanley, Tiffany (February 24, 2024). "Chief justice's Christian reasoning in IVF opinion sparks alarm over church-state separation". Associated Press. Retrieved February 26, 2024.
  16. ^ a b Brown, Elizabeth (February 21, 2024). "Frozen Embryos Are Now Children Under Alabama Law". Reason. Retrieved February 26, 2024.
  17. ^ Hughes, Trevor (February 21, 2024). "IVF supporters are 'freaking out' over Alabama court decision treating embryos as children". USA TODAY. Retrieved 2024-02-23.
  18. ^ "After Ruling, University of Alabama at Birmingham Health System Pauses I.V.F. Procedures".
  19. ^ Wolfe, Elizabeth; Gallagher, Dianne; Kallingal, Mallika (February 23, 2024). "Alabama attorney general's office says it has 'no intention' to prosecute IVF families, providers". CNN. Retrieved February 25, 2024.
  20. ^ Shapiro, Emily (February 26, 2024). "Explosive detonated outside Alabama attorney general's office on Saturday". ABC News. Retrieved February 26, 2024.
  21. ^ a b Howard, Jacquiline (February 24, 2024). "How the reversal of Roe v. Wade led to the Alabama Supreme Court ruling that frozen embryos are children". CNN. Retrieved February 25, 2024.
  22. ^ Capelouto, Susanna; Gassiott, Kyle; Hodgin, Mary Scott (February 23, 2024). "Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey says she wants to protect IVF treatment after court ruling". NPR. Retrieved February 25, 2024.
  23. ^ https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/alabama-senate-house-pass-bills-protect-ivf-rcna141184
  24. ^ https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/alabama-lawmakers-ivf-protection-bill-vote-rcna141710
  25. ^ Jalonick, Mary Clare; Groves, Stephen (February 28, 2024). "Republicans block Senate bill to protect nationwide access to IVF treatments". Associated Press. Retrieved February 28, 2024.
  26. ^ "Embryo Ruling Doesn't Rely on Federal Cases, But May Erode Them". news.bloomberglaw.com. Retrieved 2024-03-04.
  27. ^ a b Chidi, George (22 February 2024). "'Outrageous and unacceptable': Biden and Harris decry Alabama court ruling on IVF". The Guardian. Retrieved 24 February 2024.
  28. ^ a b c d Zurcher, Anthony; McCausland, Phil (February 23, 2024). "Alabama IVF ruling a political gift for Democrats, headache for Republicans". BBC News. Retrieved February 24, 2024.
  29. ^ Fox, Lauren; Zenona, Melenie (February 23, 2024). "GOP lawmakers and candidates race to distance themselves from Alabama court decision". CNN. Retrieved February 24, 2024.
  30. ^ "Trump says he supports I.V.F. and calls for the treatment to remain legal-though this is in contradiction to his numerous past statements that he believes life begins at fertilization".
  31. ^ Metzger, Bryan (February 23, 2024). "125 House Republicans — including Speaker Mike Johnson — back a 'life at conception' bill without any IVF exception". Business Insider. Retrieved February 24, 2024.
  32. ^ a b Hixenbaugh, Mike (February 22, 2024). "Alabama justice who ruled embryos are people says American law should be rooted in the Bible". NBC News. Retrieved February 25, 2024.
  33. ^ Smith, Peter; Stanley, Tiffany (February 23, 2024). "Chief justice's Christian reasoning in IVF opinion sparks alarm over church-state separation". Associated Press. Retrieved February 25, 2024.
  34. ^ Hughes, Trevor; Arshad, Minnah (February 22, 2024). "Alabama justice invoked 'the wrath of a holy God' in IVF opinion. Is that allowed?". USA Today. Retrieved February 25, 2024.

External links

  • Opinion by the Supreme Court of Alabama released on February 16, 2024
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/LePage_v._Center_for_Reproductive_Medicine"