Frozen Embryos at Core of Texas Divorce Discord
On Sunday, the Los Angeles Times detailed a new legal terrain involving in-vitro fertilization and the question of what to do with frozen embryos during divorces. The Supreme Court of Texas is currently set to hear such a case in which a divorcing couple is divided on what should be done with three frozen embryos, a strange piece of community property to say the least.
After years of infertility treatments, Augusta Roman thought that she was being given the best chance to have a child. A doctor had removed 13 eggs from her ovaries and fertilized six of them with the sperm of her husband Randy. Just as she was set to have the embryos implanted in her womb, Randy backed out on the procedure. Apparently, the possibility of having a kid with his wife confirmed Randy’s doubts about the marriage. While the couple tried counseling, they later got divorced and are now arguing about what to do with the embryos.
Augusta Roman wants possession of the embryos and to have them implanted; in doing so, she would thus agree to absolver Randy from any financial or parental obligations. Randy Roman wants the embryos destroyed and has said that he couldn’t turn his back on his “genetic offspring.” He has cited a cryopreservation consent form stating that the frozen embryos “should be discarded” if they were to divorce. Randy Roman has said that the couple initialed this document and is now hoping that the Supreme Court of Texas will side with him and destroy the embryos. We’ll keep you updated on any more developments with this case.
November 1st, 2007 at 8:31 pm
I don’t think Augusta Roman has the right to her ex-husbans sperm. He doesn’t want to have a child with her. He has that right. Augusta is trying to say she just signed the contract for destroying the eggs in thecase of divorce because she was only trying to get pregnant. I don’t believe that. What are her real motives for now wanting(after divorce) to conceive a child using her ex-husbands sperm?