Frozen Pre-embryos and the Right to Change One’s Mind

Biological technology used for purposes of human reproduction has generated a number of issues involving contract law, genetic parenthood, and public policy. One such issue arises from disagreements about the fate of frozen embryos. This issue presents special challenges to the judicial process even though historically courts have had experience in applying reason to the most emotional of issues. In recent decades, new methods of assisted reproduction using medical technology have enabled infertile couples to have a child who is biologically related to at least one parent. These technologies have also enabled individuals in same sex relationships and unmarried individuals to bear and raise children. Often labeled assisted reproductive technologies (ART), these techniques have become commonplace in modern, technologically sophisticated countries such as the United States, Israel, and the United Kingdom. Disputes arising from the use of ART may involve couples or even three or more contestants. Among the ARTs that involve third parties are those utilizing artificial insemination of both married and unmarried women, sperm donation, and in vitro fertilization (IVF) involving egg or embryo donation. These techniques have required courts and legislatures to redefine the parent-child relationship—a task that becomes even more difficult when a child is brought into the world by a surrogate. In the United States, most states have been slow to adopt legislation to resolve these issues; many states still have nothing more than their version of the 1973 Uniform Parentage Act,