NJSBA Family Law Section

 View Only
  • 1.  Warning...

    Posted 08-15-2018 01:03 PM

    I have been dealing with a client who was divorcing and wanted his attorney to deal with the ownership and eventual use of a frozen embryo.  The divorce attorney drafted some language into the MSA on the date of the divorce at the courthouse and all parties signed the agreement and the divorce went through.


    Needless to say, the language was ineffective for the release of the embryo to the former husband, even though it is was his genetic material and a donor egg and no surrogacy program wanted to touch the matter because of potential parentage issues.  When trying to resolve some of the issues, the former wife demanded more "compensation" to sign further documents, as the MSA was a final and theoretically conclusive and comprehensive document.  This matter might be headed to a malpractice claim or further proceedings against the former wife.


    Moral of the story - please consider consulting with an assisted reproduction attorney when dealing with any embryos created during a marriage - the potential ownership and use issues (parentage) issues are complicated and clinics and surrogacy programs don't like to be involved with potential conflict situations.  


    Deb Guston



    Immediate Past President,
    Academy of Adoption & Assisted Reproduction Attorneys


    I will return your email as soon as possible.  Not all emails are read or reviewed in real time.  If this is an emergency, please call the office during regular business hours.
    =============================
    Debra E. Guston, Esq., C.A.E.
    Guston & Guston, L.L.P.
    55 Harristown Road, Suite 106
    Glen Rock NJ 07452
    (201) 447-6660
    Fax (201) 447-3831

    _____________________________
    This message is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, Title 18, U.S. Code §2510-2512.
    This e-mail message and any attached files are the exclusive property of the law firm of Guston & Guston, L.L.P. and are subject to copyright.
    This communication is deemed privileged and confidential and is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed.
    Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited.
    If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.



  • 2.  RE: Warning...

    Posted 08-15-2018 01:09 PM

    Deb,

     

    I love reading posting from you, and for that matter the whole LGBT section. I always learn so much. This latest one is really something.

     

    Kit Dupuis

     

     






  • 3.  RE: Warning...

    Posted 08-16-2018 04:01 PM
    Hard to believe the ex-wife would have any ownership interest, equitable or otherwise, in a donor egg fertilized with the ex-husband's sperm under this scenario!

    Jane R. Altman, Esquire
    Altman, Legband & Mayrides




  • 4.  RE: Warning...

    Posted 08-16-2018 06:46 PM
    She could/should because it was created during the marriage, was originally intended to be used by them as a couple to parent and she signed consent documents at the IVF clinic consenting as the spouse   Under existing statute when a husband consents to his wife undergoing artificial insemination, he is deemed the father. We don't have exact reciprocal law but the analogy seems obvious and equitable 

    ================================
    Debra E. Guston, Esq.

    Immediate Past President - Academy of Adoption & Assisted Reproduction Attorneys 
    201-447-6660 w
    201-417-8252 c





  • 5.  RE: Warning...

    Posted 08-16-2018 06:47 PM
    And one final thought, this is important under the new GC law where the wife would not be required to adopt a genetically unrelated child if delivered by a carrier under the law. 

    ================================
    Debra E. Guston, Esq.

    Immediate Past President - Academy of Adoption & Assisted Reproduction Attorneys 
    201-447-6660 w
    201-417-8252 c





  • 6.  RE: Warning...

    Posted 08-20-2018 02:32 PM
    I understand this intellectually, and if a child were going to be produced from this fertilized egg it would be a different story, but I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that the parties were divorcing and the father would never proceed with the original plan to produce a child. The various potential scenarios are straight out of a college philosophy course!

    Jane R. Altman, Esquire
    Altman, Legband & Mayrides




  • 7.  RE: Warning...

    Posted 08-20-2018 03:04 PM

    Andrew Rochester, the attorney who litigated the frozen embryo case that I think directly speaks to these issues, can be reached at: "Andy Rochester Esq" <[email protected]>
    Of course, I keep telling the guy that he oughta just join this list, but until he does, he's responsive to emails.

    Deb Guston may be just as good on the law - don't know.

    Either way, I've never had cause to review the cases on it in detail, but I'm fairly sure this is all settled law.


    <x-sigsep></x-sigsep>

    David Perry Davis, Esq.
    ----------------------------------------------------
    www.FamilyLawNJ.pro
    ----------------------------------------------------
    57 Hamilton Avenue -- Suite 301
    Hopewell, NJ 08525
    Voice: 609-466-1222
    Fax: 609-466-1223






  • 8.  RE: Warning...

    Posted 08-20-2018 03:54 PM
      |   view attached
    The case law in NJ deals simply with a contest between two genetic parents, one of whom wanted to use the embryo to gestate and one who objected as they did not wish to be a parent to another child.  The law has developed, generally, in this area, on these facts to favor the objecting party, as the courts have found it unconstitutional to compel parenthood.  The courts have weighted the equities when the person seeking parenthood by use of a frozen embryo may have suffered some permanent infertility and the use of the embryo may be the only chance that individual has at parenting a child who is genetically theirs.

    However, in Arizona - a cautionary tale, they enacted a law that in the absence of "unambiguous" written agreement between the parties, the court is required to favor the party wishing to gestate the embryo.

    There are many scenarios where there is NO settled law, please don't resume that, especially if there are no written agreements other than compulsory clinic documents or there are interstate issues, etc.
    =============================
    Debra E. Guston, Esq., C.A.E.
    Guston & Guston, L.L.P.
    55 Harristown Road, Suite 106
    Glen Rock NJ 07452
    (201) 447-6660
    Fax (201) 447-3831
    www.gustonlaw.com

    Immediate Past President-Academy of 
    Adoption & Assisted Reproduction Attorneys



       
    Angel in Adoption Recipient 2017

                  




    Attachment(s)

    tiff
    PastedGraphic-2.tiff   46 KB 1 version