re: Alabama IVF ruling

quote:

---

was raised strict Pentecostal, evangelicals are a damn curse on the Republican party. The Dems have the progressives and the GOP have the evangelicals. Both are cancers to their parties.

---

clearly no relationship with Christ. you're just a blind,blithering idiot

quote:

---

What additional burdens are on an IVF clinic that weren’t there before? Be very specific.

---

Structural upgrades that can handle a direct hit by a hurricane or tornado (CMU blocks with all cells filled with large rebar/cell), roofs that are rated for excessive uplift (category 5+), extra redundancies and refrigeration for ensuring proper ambient temperatures insulation (HVAC equipment), electrical upgrades that ensure extended operation without facility power, including fuel, generators, surge protectors.

You're basically going to have to ensure the facility storing the embryos is a bunker that can handle every tornado or hurricane thrown at it can keep the embryos floating along, otherwise the operators face severe legal and criminal liability. The vast majority of healthcare facilities are designed to ensure the occupants survive long enough to get out, not keep subzero temperatures for extended for embryos to survive off the grid.

That costs a lot of money, and most IVF facilities don't have that level of infrastructure associated with it.

quote:

---

Right. The cost of doing business in healthcare with regards to insurance is already incredibly high. IVF is largely a cash ballgame. And very expensive. I don’t think you have any idea how this situation will be more expensive. You’re just sure that it will be because the “Evangelicals are messing with healthcare!!”

---

So if it's already high, and you're lowering the hurdles to sue and put IVF operators in jail, you seem to think that will not increase the costs? Brilliant! Let's make it more expensive and hope IVF operators stick around. This sounds like a great idea.

BTW you're going to have a hard time finding my last post mentioning anything regarding evangelicals. I don't care about religion (or lack there of), I care about how idiotic policies from the extremes of both parties impact normal people.

quote:

---

Structural upgrades that can handle a direct hit by a hurricane or tornado (CMU blocks with all cells filled with large rebar/cell), roofs that are rated for excessive uplift (category 5+), extra redundancies and refrigeration for ensuring proper ambient temperatures insulation (HVAC equipment), electrical upgrades that ensure extended operation without facility power, including fuel, generators, surge protectors.

---

Lol.

quote:

---

Wait, what about the poor zygotes?

---

Not sure if this was meant as sarcasm, but for those of us who believe life begins at conception, this has been a legitimate concern and criticism of IVF since the start.

quote:

---

All comes down to if you believe life begins at conception.

---

By that standard birth control is abortion, as it precludes fertilized embyos from attaching to the uterine walls of a female, killing the embryo. This logic could get very interesting.

quote:

---

Throwing away IVF embryos isn’t murder. IVF “conceived” lifeforms aren’t real people.

---

Rational, literate people believe this.

Theocrats disagree, and currently run one of our two political parties.

quote:

---

oogabooga68

---

Thank you for proving my point.

Only the ignorant agree with the Alabama theocratic Supreme Court ruling.

Forgive my ignorance -

So a woman's body selects a cluster of eggs each month that are disposed of through her menstrual cycle. One 1 egg per month is actually selected for ovulation. So theoretically, a healthy woman has approximately 400-500 fertilizable eggs in her life (12 cycles per year, 1 egg per cycle, 40 years or fertility).

So if IVF takes her one egg for that month and pairs it with sperm, you get a lab embryo that is then implanted into the women's uterus. This assumes the fertilization is successful in the lab. It also requires successful implantation in the uterus for pregnancy.

So this result is allowing a wrongful death proceeding if an embryo is destroyed. I'm not privy to Alabama law, but I imagine there is a law akin to medical malpractice, where a doctor has to attest to the medical duty of care (higher than regular duty of care) being breached before a lawsuit can survive beyond the pleadings.

Practically speaking, it will increase insurance premiums for IVF facilities, force them to handle embryos with more care and precision, or face higher consequences.

I don't think this creates a strict liability scenario where any destruction is per se actionable - a Plaintiff would still have to show the facility or technician breached a duty of reasonable care. Natural disasters are unlikely to create a wrongful death claim.

Sorry for rambling - am I missing something? I'm not sure this is a real negative.

quote:

---

as it makes its way to SCOTUS

---

SCOTUS isn't going to touch this case. The legislature is tasked with creating laws and defining the terms contained in those laws.

Alabama (or any other state) is more than able to define to whom a law applies. In the AL case, the court interpreted that the legislature intended for the Wrongful Death of a Minor statute to apply to an embryo. The legislature can amend that statute next session to clarify and remove an embryo from the definition should it so choose.