Natallie Evans has today lodged her application with the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Natallie is asking the Court to consider whether the UK law, which now requires her six stored embryos to be destroyed, is a breach of her human rights.
Natallie underwent IVF treatment in 2001 with her then fiancé Howard Johnston following a diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Six embryos were created and placed in storage. Natallie underwent surgery to remove her ovaries, which was successful. She and Howard then broke up.
Natallie still wished to use the embryos as they represent her last chance of having a natural child of her own. Her former fiancée Howard Johnston refused to give his permission, which the UK law requires, before they could be used. The clinic where the embryos were stored considered they had no choice other then to destroy the embryos.
Natallie applied to the Family Division of the High Court to obtain an order that she be permitted to use the embryos. She argued that Howard had already consented to the creation, storage and use of the embryos and should not be allowed to change his mind.
Natallie was unsuccessful both in the High Court and subsequently in the Court of Appeal. The judges ruled that the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 was clear. Both parties must consent to the use of the embryos. Howard was entitled to withdraw his consent at any time before they were used. He was able to change his mind even if it had such tragic consequences for Natallie.
Natallie petitioned the House of Lords in an effort to overturn the decision of the Court of Appeal but the House of Lords decided they would not hear her case.
Her solicitor Muiris Lyons of London based Alexander Harris said:
"Natallie has now been left with no choice other than to take her case to Europe. She feels very strongly that she should be allowed to use her stored embryos. She cannot understand that the law requires them to be destroyed when they represent her last chance to have a natural child of her own. If the UK law says that Howard can change his mind at any time, then Natallie feels that the law is unfair and breaches her human rights. It gives a man an absolute veto, which outside of the world of IVF and fertility treatment he would not enjoy. It effectively discriminates against women who have to undergo IVF treatment because of infertility. "
Natallie is also arguing that the UK law unnecessarily interferes with her right to a private and family life.
Perhaps the most significant argument she relies on however, is that the embryos may have a qualified right to life of their own. This argument goes to the heart of the debate about when life is created and the sanctity of human life. It is an argument that has not yet been considered by the European Court of Human Rights in the context of IVF and fertility treatment and the Court's ruling could have a profound effect on the law, medicine and science.
Natallie said: "I feel that I have to pursue every possible route to save my embryos. I hoped that I could have done so in the UK, but I now have no other choice but to take my case to Europe."
It is not yet known how long it will take for the European Court to consider Natallie's case. There is a significant backlog of cases in Europe but her lawyers Alexander Harris have requested an expedited hearing in view of the urgency of Natallie's situation. If she is to be permitted to use the embryos then she must do so before October 2006, which is when the five-year maximum storage period under the law expires.
Related news stories
- 21/05/2004: Solicitor Reviews IVF Treatment
- 29/11/2004: House of Lords rejects Natallie Evans' petition to appeal
- 09/09/2004: Natallie Evans appeals to the House of Lords
- 23/07/2005: Natallie Evans applies for funding to take her case to the House of Lords
Related news stories
- 07/03/2006: European Court of Human Rights to rule on frozen embryo case
- 16/08/2005: Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act reviewed
- 11/04/2005: Sperm donors lose anonymity: Solicitor Muiris Lyons speaks to Butterworths
If you have any comments in relation to this story, please use the online discussion forum.
This news section contains stories of interest to our clients from publicly available news sources. Where we are representing the clients referred to in the news material we will say so. Where we do not represent individuals or bodies mentioned or quoted, the inclusion of the news story in our news section is not intended nor should it be taken to imply that we act for the individual or body concerned.
Without your team of experts I don't think I would have been successful: Anne, Stafford
