Determining the status of non-transferred embryos in Ireland: A conspectus of case law and implications for clinical IVF practice

Philosophy, Ethics, and Humanities in Medicine

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2009, Pages

  Sills, Eric Scott ^a,b   Murphy, Sarah Ellen ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^b Sims International Fertility Clinic   (Ireland)

^c UNIVERSITY COLLEGE CORK   (Ireland)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; EDITORIAL; EMBRYO DISPOSITION; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; IRELAND; LEGAL ASPECT;

EMBRYO DISPOSITION; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMANS; IRELAND; PHYSICIAN'S PRACTICE PATTERNS;

EID: 68349089072     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17475341     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1747-5341-4-8     Document Type: Article

References (91)

1. Velez JR Immediate animation: Thomistic principles applied to Norman Ford's objections Ethics Med 2005, 21:11-28. 15835089
2. Crocken SL The "embryo" wars at the epicenter of science, law, religion, and politics Fam Law Q 2005, 39:599-632. 16610149
3. Quinlan JA Right to life of the unborn - an assessment of the eighth amendment to the Irish constitution Brigh Young Univ Law Rev 1984, 1984:371-402. 11655795
4. Gillon R Reproductive technology in Britain the debate after the Warnock Report Hastings Cent Rep 1987, 17:S16-8. 11644023
5. Mulkay M The triumph of the pre-embryo interpretations of the human embryo in Parliamentary debate over embryo research Soc Stud Sci 1994, 24:611-39. 10.1177/030631279402400401 11639422
6. Noonan JT An almost absolute value in history The Morality of Abortion Harvard University Press Cambridge 1970:51.
7. Harris J The Value of Life Routledge & Kegan Paul London 1985
8. Warnock M The Warnock report Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985, 291:187-90. 1416355 3926117 10.1136/bmj.291.6489.187
9. Robertson JA Children of Choice. Freedom and the New Reproductive Technologies Princeton University Press Princeton, New Jersey 1994
10. Raposo VL Osuna E Embryo dignity the status and juridical protection of the in vitro embryo Med Law 2007, 26:737-46. 18284114
11. Human Embryology & Fertilisation Act (1990) Chapter 37 Office of Public Sector Information (London) 1990
12. Statement by the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, RCPI regarding their role in the approval of IVF surrogacy [press release] 2009
13. Donnelly P Minister to control the Medical Council Irish Medical Times [newspaper] 2008:5.
14. Medical Council (Ireland) A Guide to Ethical Conduct and Behaviour and Fitness to Practice 6 2004
15. Council of Europe Commission directive 2006/86/EC of 24 October 2006 implementing Directive 2004/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells
16. Heffernan B Legal loophole allowing private clinics to operate without checks The Independent [newspaper] 2008:3.
17. Department of Health & Children (Ireland) Tanaiste welcomes publication of the report of the Committee on Assisted Human Reproduction [press release] 2005
18. Report of the Commission on Assisted Reproduction 2005 Government of Ireland Publications: Dublin 2005
19. Kelly JM The Irish Constitution Butterworths: Dublin Hogan G, Whyte G 4 2002
20. Ahnen CD Disputes over frozen embryos: Who wins, who loses, and how do we decide? - An analysis of Davis v. Davis, York v. Jones, and state statutes affecting reproductive choices Creighton Law Rev 1991, 24:1299-357. 16130262
21. Healy A Sense of a case just beginning, not ending The Irish Times [newspaper] 2006 4
22. Sills ES Healy C Building Irish families through surrogacy: Medical and judicial issues for the advanced reproductive technologies Reprod Health 2008, 5:9. 2585562 18983640 10.1186/1742-4755-5-9
23. Dail debates 1983:2197.
24. Attorney General (SPUC) v Open Door Counselling Ltd 1988 593
25. Birchard K New ethical guidelines on abortion released in Ireland Lancet 1998, 352:1840. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)79914-1 11656956
26. Dickens BM Comparative judicial embryology: Judges' approaches to unborn human life Can J Fam Law. 1990, 9(1):180-192. 11656080
27. Jones DG Telfer B Before I was an embryo, I was a pre-embryo: Or was I? Bioethics 1995, 9:32-49. 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1995.tb00299.x 11653031
28. O'Mahony TP Status of the unborn has yet to be determined by the Supreme Court The Irish Examiner [newspaper] 2006:7.
29. Kingston J Whelan A Bacik Ivana Abortion and the Law Round Hall Sweet & Maxwell: Dublin 1997
30. Attorney General v. X [1992] 1 I.R. 1; ILRM 401
31. McCullogh LB Chervenak FA A critical analysis of the concept and discourse of 'unborn child' Am J Bioeth. 2008, 8(7):34-39. 10.1080/ 15265160802248161
32. Constitutional Review Group (Report) Dublin Stationery Office 1996:275.
33. All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution, Fifth Progress Report on Abortion Government of Ireland Publications 2000:100-2.
34. Whyte GF Reservation in relation to recommendations concerning the embryo, in The Report of the Commission on Assisted Reproduction 2005:73.
35. Pachman TS Disputes over frozen preembryos and the "right not to be a parent" Columbia J Gend Law 2003, 12:128-53. 16281330
36. Elster NR Assisted reproductive technologies: Contracts, consents, and contoversies Am J Fam Law 2005, 18:193-9. 17153245
37. de Rosa FM The transfer of abandoned frozen embryos - identifying the object of the act Natl Cathol Bioeth Q 2005, 5:59-62. 15887340
38. Sherlock A The right to life of the unborn and the Irish Constitution Ir Jurist 1989:21-30.
39. Madden D Medicine, Ethics & the Law Butterworths: Dublin 2002
40. Hecht v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County Court of Appeal 20 Cal Reptr 2d 275 1993
41. Sieck WA Comment, In vitro fertilisation and the right to procreate: The right to say no Univ Penn Law Rev 1998, 147:435-85. 10.2307/3312836
42. Smajdor A Deciding the fate of disputed embryos: Ethical issues in the case of Natallie Evans J Exp Clin Assist Reprod 2007, 4;2. 1936431 17610737 10.1186/1743-1050-4-2
43. Murray v. Ireland 1985 I.R. 532, ILRM 542
44. Hansard (House of Lords) 1990, 515:750-751.
45. Morgan D Issues in Medical Law and Ethics Cavendish: London 2001
46. Grubb A Challenges in Medical Care John Wiley & Sons: Chichester England 1992
47. Petralia SR Resolving disputes over excess frozen embryos through thr confines of property and contract law J Law Health 2003, 17:2002-103.
48. Rosado M Sign on the dotted line: Enforceability of signed agrements, upon divorce of the married couple, concerning the disposition of their frozen pre-embryos New Engl Law Rev 2002, 36;1041-75. 15162814
49. Grubb A I, me, mine: Bodies, parts and property Med Law Int 1998, 3:299-317. 11657809
50. Collins JL Hecht v. Superior Court: Recognizing a property right in reproductive material Univ Louisv J Fam Law. 1995, 33(3):661-684.
51. Davis v. Davis 1992 842 S.W.2d 588, 597 (Tenn. 1992)
52. American Fertility Society. Ethics Committee Ethical considerations of the new reproductive technologies Fertil Steril 1986, 46(Suppl 1):1S-94S.
53. Robertson JA Posthumous reproduction Indiana Law J 1994, 69:1027-65. 11653158
54. Creagh C Property in the Living Body Bar Rev 2001:209-20.
55. York v. Jones. U.S. District Court, Virginia (Norfolk Div.) Fed Suppl 1989, 717:421-9.
56. Trib Gr Inst Creteil Paraplaix v. CECOS 1984:16-17. Gazette du Palais (2e sem): 560
57. Mason K McCall-Smith RA Laurie GT Law and Medical Ethics Butterworths: London 5 1999
58. Nozick R Anarchy, State and Utopia Blackwell Publishing: Oxford 1974
59. Steiner H Property and the body: A philosophical perspective Property Rights in the Human Body London: King's College Centre of Medical Law & Ethics, Occasional Papers Series 2 Stern K, Walsh P 1997
60. Harris JW Property and Justice Clarenden Press: Oxford 1996
61. Doodeward v. Spence 1908 HCA 45; (1908) 6 CLR 406
62. R v. Kelly and Lindsay 1999 QB 621
63. Fleming NA Navigating the slippery slope of frozen embryo disputes: The case for a contractual approach Temple Law Rev 2002, 75:345-74. 15156893
64. Sills ES McLoughlin LJ Genton MG Walsh DJ 1 Coull GD Walsh APH Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and prophylactic human embryo cryopreservation: Analysis of reproductive outcome following thawed embryo transfer J Ovarian Res 2008, 1:7. 2585559 19014420 10.1186/ 1757-2215-1-7
65. Sills ES Shkrobot L Coull GD Salma U Walsh DJ Walsh APH First Irish pregnancies after IVF with gestational carrier Ir Med J 2009, 102:56-8. 19405323
66. Windsor KH Disposition of cryopreserved preembryos after divorce Iowa Law Rev 2003, 88:1001-34. 15214352
67. R v. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ex parte Blood 1997 2 All ER 687
68. Council of Europe The European Convention on Human Rights [Rome], and its five protocols 1952
69. Evans v. United Kingdom 2007 [2007] 6339/05 Eur. Ct. H.R. 2
70. Alghrani A Commentary-Deciding the Fate of Frozen Embryos Med Law Rev 2005, 13:244-56. 10.1093/medlaw/fwi014
71. Colker R Pregnant men revisited, or Sperm is cheap, eggs are not Hastings Law J 1996, 47:1063-80.
72. A.Z. v. B.Z 2000:431. Mass. 150; 725 N.E.2d 1051
73. Munyon JH Protectionism and freedom of contract: The erosion of female autonomy in surrogacy decisions Suffolk Univ Law Rev 2003, 36:717-44. 15568233
74. Roman v. Roman 2006 S.W.3d 40
75. Coulter C Ownership of embryos case will raise very difficult questions The Irish Times [newspaper] 2006:3.
76. Coulter C Case shows IVF consent forms must be clearer and broader The Irish Times [newspaper] 2006:4.
77. Waldman E The parent trap: Uncovering the myth of "coerced parenthood" in frozen embryo disputes Am Univ Law Rev 2004, 53:1021-62. 15529471
78. Apel SB Cryopreserved embryos: A response to "forced parenthood" and the role of intent Fam Law Q 2005, 39:663-81. 16610152
79. Coleman CH Procreative liberty and contemporaneous choice: An inalienable rights approach to frozen embryo disputes Minn Law Rev 1999, 84:55-67. 16514764
80. Feliciano T Davis v. Davis: What about future disputes? Conn Law Rev 1993, 26:305-319. 11660034
81. Litowitz v. Litowitz 2000 Wash. App. 934, 10 P.3d 1086, 2000 Wash. App
82. Kwok CTS Baby contracts Yale Law J 2001, 110:1287. 10.2307/797529 12741373
83. Bradley L Life on ice for thousands in limbo The Sunday Independent [newspaper] 2006:5.
84. Trespalacios MJ Comment, Frozen embryos: Towards an equitable solution Miami Law Rev 1992, 46:803-34.
85. Haut MC Divorce and the disposition of frozen embryos Hofstra Law Rev 1999, 28:493-521.
86. Annett T Commentary-Balancing Competing Interests Over Frozen Embryos: The Judgment of Solomon? Evans v. United Kingdom Med Law Rev 2006, 14:425-33. 10.1093/medlaw/fwl015 16987925
87. Forster H Donley C Slomka J Comment on ABA's Proposed Frozen Embryo Disposition Policy Fertil Steril 1999, 71:994-5. 10.1016/ S0015-0282(99)00129-6 10360898
88. Silver LM Remis-Silver S Confused heritage and the absurdity of genetic ownership Harv J Law Technol. 1998, 11(3):593-613. 12731550
89. Ferguson v. McKiernan 2007 940 A. 2d. 1236 (PA. 2007)
90. Robertson JA Embryos, families and procreative liberty: The legal structure of the new reproduction South Calif Law Rev 1986, 59:939-1041. 11655852
91. Dooley D Assisted reproduction: The pursuit of consensus? Med Law J Ir 1999, 5:65-74.