Easter eggs
I'm not sure what to make of this whole frozen eggs situation. For those who don't know what I'm talking about, a lady who was left infertile by cancer treatment wanted to use some pre-fertilised eggs that she had stored before her treatment for this very purpose. The problem is, she has split up from her then-fiance, who doesn't want her to use them.
Yesterday, she was denied the right to use them at European High Court, or some such place.
Now, the court did reach the correct decision, in that it followed the law. The law states that both parties must give consent for them to be used. This is fairly black-and-white. But the law is not always best applied as such.
I understand the lady wants a baby that is genetically hers. Of course she can adopt, but she wants one of her own flesh and blood. I understand that. It's what I'd want. This is her only chance of getting that.
The man says that he has the right to choose when he becomes a father. It may sound selfish that he can have kids later if he wants but his ex can't. But, he also has a point. If he does not want children, or does not want children by this woman, then he has the right to not be made a father by the courts. Yes, the child would not be raised by him, and I'm sure not even the CSA would chase him for maintenance payments (actually, you never know...), but he would still know that he has a child out there, even if it is legally adopted by her new partner. And of course that child may well want to find its father one day. That puts him in a very unfair situation. But, of course, he still has the choice of having children with his new partner should he so desire. His ex does not have that luxury.
I think this is one of those cases where there is no right or wrong decision. Both parties have equally valid points. I feel very sorry for the woman in this case. Being denied a child by the courts simply sounds wrong and I'm sure she is taking it very hard.
I suppose one underlying question is, is having a child a right or a privilege? I don't know the anwer to that one either. And it's one I'm glad I don't have to worry about myself.
Yesterday, she was denied the right to use them at European High Court, or some such place.
Now, the court did reach the correct decision, in that it followed the law. The law states that both parties must give consent for them to be used. This is fairly black-and-white. But the law is not always best applied as such.
I understand the lady wants a baby that is genetically hers. Of course she can adopt, but she wants one of her own flesh and blood. I understand that. It's what I'd want. This is her only chance of getting that.
The man says that he has the right to choose when he becomes a father. It may sound selfish that he can have kids later if he wants but his ex can't. But, he also has a point. If he does not want children, or does not want children by this woman, then he has the right to not be made a father by the courts. Yes, the child would not be raised by him, and I'm sure not even the CSA would chase him for maintenance payments (actually, you never know...), but he would still know that he has a child out there, even if it is legally adopted by her new partner. And of course that child may well want to find its father one day. That puts him in a very unfair situation. But, of course, he still has the choice of having children with his new partner should he so desire. His ex does not have that luxury.
I think this is one of those cases where there is no right or wrong decision. Both parties have equally valid points. I feel very sorry for the woman in this case. Being denied a child by the courts simply sounds wrong and I'm sure she is taking it very hard.
I suppose one underlying question is, is having a child a right or a privilege? I don't know the anwer to that one either. And it's one I'm glad I don't have to worry about myself.
posted by Nej at
1:02 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home