The Dobbs ruling seemingly about abortion, seems to be having wider impacts touching on embryo disputes across the United States. Post-Dobbs, Alabama passed a constitutional amendment affirming that unborn life, including the rights of unborn children, be recognised by the state, leading to a ruling that a fertility clinic be held liable under wrongful death torts when a patient caused the destruction of embryos. This ruling only lasted for a matter of weeks, however, as public backlash led to a law swiftly granting immunity to IVF clinics and related professionals.[1] [2]
The ramifications of Dobbs are again brought into question with an ongoing case being debated before the Supreme Court of Texas which could declare embryos as full human people under Texas state law. The case, titled Antoun v. Antoun, calls into question the custody of three remaining cryopreserved embryos following a divorce between the parents.[3]
The Texas Health and Safety Code Section 170A.001(5), triggered by Dobbs and sprung into effect in 2022, now defines an unborn child as a member of the human species from fertilization until birth, which could be applicable to the embryos in question. However, the case does bring to light the broader issues of the right to life, the interpretation of consent forms, and the contractual nature of these forms.[4]
The Antoun case presents a chance for the Supreme Court of Texas to define its position on whether an embryo is characterized as an unborn child, a key decision that has the potential to ignite a legal controversy similar to the one witnessed in Alabama.[5]