The Trouble With Putting All of Your Eggs in One Basket: Using a Property Rights Model to Resolve Disputes Over Cryopreserved Embryos
Bridget M. Fuselier, 14 Tex. J. on C.L. & C.R. 143 (2009)
This article covers a very current and relevant topic in today’s legal environment. Previous articles have merely discussed competing models or coverage of the disputes in the case law. My article embarks upon a comprehensive look at the specific problem presented and then goes on to offer a specific model with proposed legislation to address these disputes in a fundamentally more efficient manner.
As evidenced by current efforts in a number of states, the issue is one on the minds of the voters and legislators. However, to date, the proposed measures would have taken drastic steps to give the cryopreserved embryo personhood status, calling into question all manner of legal issues in the area of women’s reproductive choice. A very recent example comes from this recent election where Colorado voters were put to the test by being presented a proposed constitutional amendment that would have given the status of legal personhood to a fertilized human ovum. The voters rejected this proposal almost 3 to 1.
This article does not promote a personhood status and discusses in detail why such status is not correct under the law. The article goes on to propose instead a modified bundle of property rights that could be assigned to the man and woman who created each embryo and a statutory scheme for addressing disputes at the time of divorce and also disposition at the time of death of either of the parties. This article actually shows how using a property rights model will ultimately promote life over destruction while still providing a large degree of protection for individual autonomy.
