This case pulls at my heartstrings. Politically, I am pro-choice, I am personally pro-life. Meaning should I ever be pregnant, I would choose to carry the child to term, but I firmly believe others have to deal with their own personal feeling when it comes to pregnancy.

For me, I see both sides. First, a man who doesn’t want to have children with his ex and a woman whose only hope for biological children is the frozen embryos she made with him. I understand his desire not to father a child with her, but I also feel as though the embryos are her property. I see the humanity of it. Many feel that the embryos are children. It’s all complicated.

That being said, what is this case really about? Is it about two divorced people who need to settle a dispute? Is it about the legality of the agreement they signed somewhat hastily on either part? Is this case about human life as we believe it exists when it comes to conception?

What are your thoughts? I’d love to hear them.

Links to media about the case:
http://www.sfexaminer.com/trial-opening-in-sf-divorcees-frozen-embryos-dispute/

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Trial-over-divorcing-couple-s-frozen-embryos-6382260.php

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sf-court-battle-over-frozen-embryos-opens/