 |
 |
Cells in petri dish don't add up to human being February 8, 2005 <A HREF="http://a3.suntimes.com/RealMedia/ads/click_nx.ads/www.suntimes.com/output/commentary/@Middle?x">[See the attached file]</A> Outrageous. That's the only way to describe the decision by Judge Jeffrey Lawrence II in a case involving the accidental destruction of a frozen embryo at a Chicago fertility clinic. The judge decided the couple whose fertilized egg was inadvertently destroyed can sue for wrongful death. He said the pre-embryo was a legal human being -- a bunch of fertilized cells stored in a freezer is a legal person. Lawrence cited a 1980 Illinois law regarding wrongful death -- written before frozen embryos became a regular part of fertility treatments. The wrongful death act was meant, in part, to get compensation for parents whose in-utero babies were killed, for example, in traffic accidents or died due to irresponsible medical misjudgment. The judge also cited Illinois' abortion law which declares "that the unborn child is a human being from the time of conception and is, therefore, a legal person for purposes of the unborn child's right to life ..." What the judge didn't say was the Illinois law is unconstitutional and has been trumped by the 1973 federal Roe v. Wade. If the judge's logic is correct, that a pre-embryo is a human being, does that mean freezing an embryo -- not allowing it to grow and develop -- is tantamount to child abuse? That since an ice-stilled blastocyst is supposed to be a full-fledged person, it should be granted all the rights of a living child? No judge in the United States before Lawrence -- in anyone's knowledge -- has deemed a pre-embryo in a petri dish a human being. Was this just an activist judge whetting his chops on the abortion issue? Was he exercising in a symbolic way his stand against abortion? But even lawyers who are pro-life are scratching their heads about the judge's reasoning. "This is the first case I've heard of like this," said abortion opponent Victor Rosenblum, who teaches at Northwestern University's law school. He expects the decision to be appealed. The judge's decision could have an enormous impact on fertility clinics that try to help couples who can't conceive. What doctor in her right mind would be willing to help couples if there is a possibility she could be charged with murder in the event something happens to the fertilized embryos? And, would the clinic have to store the embryos forever because getting rid of them would mean committing murder? What does Lawrence's decision mean to stem cell research, promising science that involves taking stem cells from human embryos and could help those with Alzheimer's disease, juvenile diabetes, Parkinson's and other chronic illnesses? The judge's decision was a very bad one, made in the absence of clear laws enacted by the Illinois legislature. And it was faulty in its facts and its legal interpretation. It will have severe ramifications for medical practices if it is left to stand. We hope it is overturned. As quickly as possible. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To sign-off Parkinsn send a message to: mailto:[log in to unmask] In the body of the message put: signoff parkinsn