Alabama | ‘This will lead to fewer babies’: Confusion among devout Christians in US after court ruling in state that counts embryos

When the Alabama Supreme Court defined frozen embryos as children, the shock and confusion was immediate. Major hospitals withdrew fertility treatment and expectant parents sought certainty about what would happen next.

The debate over reproductive rights in the United States has long been driven by opposition to abortion by Christian groups, but the decision has divided that movement and sparked debate over the role of theology in how decisions are made. American law.

Margaret Boyce is a soft-spoken, reserved person. In his own words, not someone who likes to shout.

She had been taking fertility drugs for 10 months and was days away from her first in vitro fertilization (IVF) appointment when Alabama’s Supreme Court justices ruled. They issued a decision that ended his life.

That decision, which caused many fertility centers to cease operations, led her to turn to the Bible daily for comfort.

The 32-year-old woman and her husband have a young child, but this is the second time she has experienced infertility for which there is no explanation. Having a family has always been a dream.

“I’m one of three. I think the greatest gift you can give your son is a brother,” she said.

“The path to parenthood is different mentally, emotionally and financially for every couple,” she added with a teary eye.

“This decision has added more unnecessary anxiety to something that is already very difficult“,

A devout Christian like Margaret has difficulty understanding the decision, the outcome of which she clearly sees as a life-making process.

“God tells you to go, be fruitful and multiply,” he says.

In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) is a difficult and lengthy treatment in which an egg is fertilized with sperm in the laboratory to create a microscopic embryo. The fertilized embryo is then transferred to the woman’s uterus, where pregnancy can result, although this does not happen in all cases.

The fetus is often frozen or destroyed.

Introduces IVF About 2% of pregnancies in the United States.

An Alabama court ruled that the state’s infanticide law covers not only fetuses in the womb, but also fetuses held in a laboratory or storage facility.

It did not outright ban or ban IVF, but it still created deep uncertainty among clinics and medical professionals who handle embryos and fear the procedure.

In recent days, the state attorney general’s office said it “does not intend” to bring criminal charges against IVF clinics, but one clinic told the BBC that The statement lacked details and did not allay their fears.

Although most of the justices based their rulings on the law, the president of the court, Tom Parker, used scriptures to justify his decision.

The people of Alabama, he wrote in his opinion, adopted a “theological view of the sanctity of life” reflected in their state constitution.

Studying religious sources from classical Christian theologians such as St. Thomas Aquinas and modern orthodox Christian manifestos, he concluded that “even before birth, all human beings bear the image of God and their lives cannot be destroyed without erasing their dignity.” .

Some anti-abortion groups celebrated the clear application of Scripture in Judge Parker’s opinion What to justify was an important decision for them.

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, an evangelical advocacy group, described it as “a beautiful protection of life.”

But Margaret was surprised by the Chief Justice’s theological support. She does not believe in abortion, but finds it difficult to see a frozen fetus as a living person. For him, life begins with a heartbeat.

“No one understands better that a fetus is not a child than one who longs for it to be a child.”It states.

American courts sometimes make decisions ostensibly based on religious site, said Meredith Render, a professor at the University of Alabama Law. But he added that it was “rarely as clearly stated” as the Alabama chief justice’s opinion.

However, the decision was not an “isolated case” for a conservative court in a traditionally Republican-dominated state, said Kelly Baden, vice president of public policy at the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks abortion laws across the United States.

“We see that many elected officials and judges often approach this debate from a very religious perspective.”said.

Although the Supreme Court of the state of Alabama is not appointed by the President of the United States, more than 200 judges were appointed to federal courts by Donald Trump during his four-year term, giving him the enduring support of American evangelicals.

During his presidency, he succeeded in appointing three new judges to the nine-member Supreme Court. He also ruled in the historic 1973 Roe Vs. Wade was key in the decision, which ended abortion rights at the federal level.

Since that 2022 decision, which reignited a national battle over reproductive rights, courts in Missouri have used biblical teachings to restrict abortion rights, and a member of a Christian legal body whom Trump chose to judge in Texas tried to impose a national ban. Mifepristone, a commonly used abortion pill.

While many Republican politicians are comfortable with such decisions, Abortion restrictions imposed by conservative courts Has become a powerful campaign horse for Democrats in recent electionsincluding the interim period of 2022.

The Alabama decision, made by Republican judges and affecting fertility treatments widely supported by the American public, went a step further, prompting immediate fears of political retaliation in a presidential election year.

Any hint that IVF is at risk could worsen the anti-Republican outcry that fueled Roe v. Wade’s downfall was accelerated. Especially among women in the suburbs and middle class who do not favor a total ban on abortion.

Donald Trump himself, the clear favorite in the race for the Republican nomination, came out strongly in support of IVF, urging Alabama lawmakers to preserve access to the treatment.

His last rival in the race for the Republican nomination, Nikki Haley, initially appeared to support the decision, but later backed off.

“Philosophically, it’s a victory for the pro-life movement because it continues to recognize unborn life,” said Eric Johnston, president of the Alabama Pro-Life Coalition.

“But you find yourself in a very difficult situation, where you have this medical procedure that is accepted by most people, and then how do you deal with it? It’s a dilemma.”

Johnston agreed “generally” with the judges’ decision, calling it “legally and clinically well written,” but added: “The pro-life community generally supports IVF, And I’ve met and worked with many people who have had children through IVF and at the same time I think abortion is wrong.”

For patients in this Deep South state, the past week has been filled with panicked calls to clinics, emails to local legislators and a rush by some to try to transfer their frozen embryos out of state.

Rodney Miller, 46, and his wife Mary Leah, 41, spent a decade trying to have children before IVF allowed them to have twins 18 months ago.

He said he “thanks God for the advances in science and medicine” that made it possible.

The couple is undergoing the procedure again and is waiting to see if the two embryos transplanted this week will develop into pregnancies.

“This is not a victory for the Christian right,” says Miller, who works for Kerrywell, an organization that supports families affected by infertility.

“It’s a classic case where you win the battle but lose the war. Because fewer children will be born This is until things change.

“How did we get to a state where you have to leave the state if you want to terminate a pregnancy and you have to leave the state if you want to start a pregnancy through IVF?”

Whether the ruling in Alabama will influence decisions elsewhere is an open question.

Bills incorporating the idea that life begins at conception have been introduced in more than a dozen states. But the bills, while promoting the idea that an embryo or fetus is a person, don’t explicitly link it to the context of IVF, said Kelly Baden of the Guttmacher Institute.

Therefore, the Alabama ruling, with its implications that go beyond the reach of abortion, No attitudesaid.

Alabama family attorney Ashleigh Meyer Dunham, who has used IVF herself and has worked with a large number of cases affected by the ruling, said she was “horrified” to think fertility patients in other states could also be affected.

He is concerned that similar decisions may be made in other states

“My biggest worry is that people in other places will forget about us and think, ‘Oh, they’re just a conservative state, and everybody’s a redneck. Don’t worry, that’ll never happen here.’

“And the next thing we’ll see is what’s happening in other states that are ultra-conservative.”

Because the Alabama ruling involved an interpretation of state and not federal law, It is unlikely to reach the United States Supreme Court.

A bill is currently pending in the Alabama State House, introduced by Democrats, that would seek to overturn the ruling and allow fertility treatments to resume.

Republicans are expected to introduce their own bill. If they do, they will have to find a way to balance a divided religious base, with some celebrating the court ruling and others worried about its potential implications for in vitro fertilization.

Margaret prays that lawmakers find a solution.

“I’m not very outspoken, I keep to myself. My friends or family would be surprised to hear that I email every representative and senator.”

“But it’s pissed me off. That’s all I can think of right now.”

Alex Lederman contributed reporting in Alabama. Additional research by Kayla Epstein in New York.

And remember you can receive notifications. Download the latest version of our app and activate it so you don’t miss our best content.