The State of Arizona is taking an interesting tact on how to dispense with unused frozen embryos from IVF. There exists a legal issue in who owns them when a couple splits. This is further complicated by the issue of multiple partners. The embryos will be granted custody to the person that intends to develop them to birth. But Roe v. Wade complicates this matter.
... does the “right” Roe establishes end with a woman’s body no longer being encumbered, or does it extend to extinguishing any “potential” of that prenatal life to actuate itself?...
Here is the scenario: let's say that a married couple (male and female) are trying to conceive a child. The wife (A) has her eggs harvested and then fertilized by the husband (B) using IVF methods. Before the embryos can be implanted, they go through a divorce. The embryos are frozen until custody is determined. The wife does not want them. The husband does, and is therefore granted custody. Later on, the former husband meets a woman (C) and she agrees to be the surrogate for his children. She is successfully implanted with an embryo. They break up.
Can B legally force C to continue the pregnancy to full term?
If B no longer wishes to have children by C, but C desires the child, can B legally force C to terminate the pregnancy?
Can A force C to terminate, or carry to term, since they are her eggs and DNA?
The Catholic Church does not approve the use of IVF due to the destruction of unused embryos, that is, unborn children, and the lack of a unitive and procreative act needed to create life. Following The Catholic Church avoids all this legal mess.