Sofia Vergara: US actress faces lawsuit 'from own embryos'

[giblets]

Modern Family star Sofia Vergara is being, in effect, sued by two frozen embryos she conceived with the partner she split from, US media report.

The embryos, named Emma and Isabella, are listed in Louisiana court documents obtained by the New York Post.

She and Nick Loeb separated in 2014 and he has already tried unsuccessfully to sue for the embryos' custody.

The new lawsuit argues that the embryos are being deprived of their inheritance from a trust by not being born.

The trust is reported to have been created for them in Louisiana, although the embryos are located in California.

Louisiana is considered a "pro-life" state and under its law a fertilised egg is seen as a "juridical person".

The Louisiana case names a trustee as plaintiff, but not Mr Loeb himself. The suit asks that the embryos be transferred to Mr Loeb so that they can be born and receive their inheritance.

Ms Vergara, 44, and Mr Loeb, a 41-year-old businessman, created the embryos at a California clinic through in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) in 2013.

A contract signed at the time is reported to have stipulated that neither partner could do anything with the embryos without the other's consent.

Ms Vergara, according the suit, is alleged to be refusing to allow them to be implanted in a surrogate mother.

Mr Loeb's legal team allege that both Ms Vergara and Mr Loeb went into the IVF process on the understanding that the embryos would be brought to term.
'Going to hell'

The IVF process initially produced several embryos, prompting the following text message exchange, according to the plaintiff's documents.

Mr Loeb: "Now what. You can't keep 4 frozen lives forever or kill them, we will go to hell."

Ms Vergara: "We r going to hell regardless".

Ms Vergara's lawyer, Fred Silberberg, told US weekly the case against his client would fail.

"That genetic material was created pursuant to a written agreement that required both parties' written consent to attempt to create a pregnancy."

Ms Vergara is now married to American actor, Joe Manganiello. She has a son by previous marriage.

The case has again thrown the spotlight in the United States on the issue of when a fertilised egg should be considered a human being.

In the state of Ohio, Republican lawmakers have approved a bill which would ban abortions once a heartbeat has been detected in an embryo.

The measure, which has yet to be signed into law by Governor John Kasich, could mean no abortions six weeks after conception.

It would be one of the strictest abortion laws in the US if approved.

The War on Women claims another victim.

[Proteus_MST]

So if, hypothetically, the lawsuit were won ... and Ms Vergara would be forced to get those embryos implanted and carry them to term, would that be a kind of state sponsored rape?

After all she gets impregnated against her will

[ZEE]

There is only one person on this forum who can give solid insight into this and that is Kidicious.

I, for one, cannot wait to see what knowledge he blesses us with on this topic.

[giblets]

So if, hypothetically, the lawsuit were won ... and Ms Vergara would be forced to get those embryos implanted and carry them to term, would that be a kind of state sponsored rape?

After all she gets impregnated against her will

The man behind this lawsuit wants to put the embryos in a surrogate mother, but I guess hypothetically if embryos are people with a right to be carried to term I guess someone could insist on having them forcibly implanted inside women against their will.

[rah]

Yes, we are so waiting for Kid's insight.

[BeBMan]

Frozen Embryos suing ppl? Winter is coming indeed ... scared:

[Berzerker]

its here, came right after Thanksgiving

[Ben Kenobi]

So if, hypothetically, the lawsuit were won ... and Ms Vergara would be forced to get those embryos implanted and carry them to term, would that be a kind of state sponsored rape?

Actually - the suit specifically lists surrogacy.

[Ben Kenobi]

hypothetically if embryos are people with a right to be carried to term I guess someone could insist on having them forcibly implanted inside women against their will.

Actually the act of creating the embryos could be argued to create a de-facto consent to the implantation of the embryos. No one forced the mother to create the embryos. They were created for the explicit purpose of their eventual implantation.

That being said, this is yet another exhibit as to why IVF is banned by the Catholic church. Surrogacy is not the ideal option - the ideal option would be for the mother to bear her own children - but it's the better option to letting the children die.

[Uncle Sparky]

The defense should insist the embryos be produced for cross examination.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

I suggest they move the embryos to Poland and carry them to term there.

[rah]

Actually the act of creating the embryos could be argued to create a de-facto consent to the implantation of the embryos. No one forced the mother to create the embryos. They were created for the explicit purpose of their eventual implantation.

Not necessarily. They could be created as contingency planning. You can never assume motive without additional information.

[Egbert]

The War on Women claims another victim.

Beware. What if one of your sperm cells sues you?

What if they band together for a class action?

or all sue you seperately with thousands of lawsuits?

[Ben Kenobi]

Not necessarily. They could be created as contingency planning. You can never assume motive without additional information.

Say me and my wife bought a side of beef. It's been sitting in the freezer for over a year. Would it be contrary to my wife's consent were I to take the beef out and cook some? We bought it so that we could eat it. Rather than seeing the beef spoil, it makes sense to use it for the purpose intended.

Same principle here.

[Ben Kenobi]

or all sue you seperately with thousands of lawsuits?

You can be held for child support if you conceive a child. This is no different.