Birmingham, AL – In a groundbreaking decision that sent shockwaves across the fertility industry, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos are considered “children” under state law. This has enormous implications for the fate of over one million frozen embryos currently stored in clinics nationwide.
The controversial 7-2 ruling came in response to a custody battle between a divorced couple over their three frozen embryos created through in vitro fertilization (IVF). The justices sided with the ex-husband by recognizing the embryos as living children who cannot be destroyed under Alabama law.
This precedent-setting decision effectively outlaws traditional disposal or indefinite cryogenic storage of unused embryos in fertility clinics. It also opens the door for “child neglect” charges against parents and lawsuits against IVF specialists over embryo damage or loss.
For Kristia Rumbley, a mother of four living in Birmingham, the news immediately evoked worries over her three remaining embryos frozen at a local clinic since 2016.
“I would be devastated if they were taken away from me and given to another family,” said the 44-year old. “But I also don’t want them left in a state where they could potentially not be in my control.”
Like thousands of other Alabamians struggling with infertility, Rumbley turned to IVF after having her first child. The process left three unused embryos cryopreserved for future implantation or donation. But under the new legal interpretation, disposal or out-of-state transfer of those embryos could constitute a criminal offense.
Why So Many Unused Embryos Exist After IVF
Since its advent in 1978, in vitro fertilization has steadily grown into a $15 billion global industry with over 8 million babies born through assisted reproduction. It involves fertilizing a woman’s egg with sperm in a laboratory dish and later transferring the resulting embryos into the uterus.
However, success rates per IVF cycle remain low, often less than 50% for women under 35. To boost chances, clinicians harvest multiple eggs and create surplus embryos that won’t get implanted right away. The most viable embryos get prioritized while others stay frozen as backup.
Leftover healthy embryos remain cryopreserved indefinitely in storage tanks filled with liquid nitrogen. Until now, couples had the option to discard these surplus embryos once their families were complete. But Alabama’s high court just eliminated that choice by granting personhood rights to all embryos regardless of implantation status.
Legal Recognition Complicates IVF Landscape
By classifying embryos and fetuses as people with equal rights as the born, the Alabama ruling jeopardizes reproductive plans made by thousands of families in the state. It also places doctors at risk of prosecution for traditional handling of unused IVF embryos such as discarding, indefinite freezing, donation, or research.
Local fertility clinics have already halted operations due to these liability concerns. And Democratic lawmakers are now scrambling to pass legislation that would specifically exempt frozen IVF embryos from the legal definition of an “unborn child.”
But for couples like the Rumbleys who still have embryos frozen at Alabama clinics, there are fears over what could happen to these fertilized eggs given their newfound legal status. Since child welfare laws would theoretically apply to unused embryos, the state or another guardian could potentially take custody of them for neglect or abandonment.
Fate of Frozen Embryos Thrown Into Question
Currently, there are an estimated 1 million frozen embryos stored in reproductive clinics across America. The average cost of properly preserving these cryogenic tanks runs between $500 to $1,000 yearly.
Prior Supreme Court interpretations have viewed frozen embryos as property of the progenitors. Owners historically had full discretion over their disposal when no longer wanted. Some couples donate extras to other hopeful parents or medical research. But Alabama’s judicial ruling complicates such options.
For women like Rumbley facing secondary infertility, the availability of IVF provided a pathway to grow her family after having her first child naturally. Out of the six healthy embryos created in 2015, three babies were born while three leftovers remain in frozen storage.
Until now, the Birmingham mother planned to keep paying annual storage fees while weighing her limited choices. But the Alabama high court decision has introduced new uncertainty and restrictions over what can legally be done with her remaining three embryos.
State Attorney General Defers to Future Legislation
While lawyers and ethicists continue parsing through implications of the judicial bombshell, Alabama’s Attorney General Steve Marshall assured the public that he will not criminally prosecute IVF patients or providers at this time. The state’s top legal officer will defer to the legislature to pass clarifying laws on the matter.
In the meantime, some out-of-state cryopreservation banks are offering discounted transfers for Alabamians who want to move their embryos out of the state. But for women like Rumbley, even transporting her three leftover embryos could technically constitute “child endangerment” under the expanded legal interpretation if something goes wrong in transit.
Until new statutes get enacted, IVF practitioners remain in an emotionally fraught holding pattern over the fate of frozen embryos storing in their Alabama clinics. Thousands of families now confront difficult questions about what will happen to their unused embryos given this unprecedented conferral of rights upon fertilized eggs stored in cryogenic tanks.
