RESOLVE STATEMENT: HB 1; Section 7 Virginia Personhood Bill

Since 1974, RESOLVE: The National Infertility Association has been helping women and men diagnosed with infertility build their families.  Now that Virginia is pushing a so-called "personhood" bill, House Bill 1 (HB1) to give legal rights to a fertilized eggs (microscopic embryos), our aim is to support and protect the citizens of Virginia who face infertility, now and in the future.  It is our goal to make sure that all treatment options are always available to Virginia residents, that they have the same options as patients in the rest of the nation.

HB1 was different from other personhood bills in that it contained, in Section 7, an alleged "carve-out" for "lawful assisted conception." When we looked at it closer, however, we concluded that the language of the carve-out contained loopholes so that infertility patients would not really be protected.  RESOLVE made its conclusion about Section 7 known in public statements.

On Friday, February 17, 2012, RESOLVE was contacted by an organization thought to be close to the bill's sponsor and one that had a hand in the bill's drafting, proposing to recommend changing the language of Section 7 in exchange for RESOLVE's endorsement of HB1.  We were not expecting to be approached in this way, but we gave the  person a chance to propose alternative language.  We reviewed this language at length over the holiday weekend and consulted with leading authorities in the field of reproductive medicine, including The American Society for Reproductive Medicine, the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technologies, the American Academy of Assisted Reproductive Technology Attorneys, and the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys.  They concur with us in concluding that the redrafted Section 7 will still have negative effects for infertility patients, including the following:

• The status of embryos post-treatment remains unclear, and patients could lose the right to determine what to do with their embryos.
• The status of frozen embryos not needed for future family building would be unclear.
• Laboratory use of nonviable embryos not intended for pregnancy would be unclear.
• The different classes of embryos would be confusing.  Patients who have ectopic pregnancies after IVF might (or might not - it's not clear) be able to be treated without having to balance the embryo's rights, while patients who have ectopic pregnancies after natural conception could not be treated.
• Patients and doctors in other states do not face this kind of uncertainty.

There is another significant problem with HB1.   Sec. 3 provides: "The natural parents of unborn children have protectable interests in the life, health, and well-being of their unborn child."  This means that when donor eggs or sperm are used in infertility treatment, the donor has the "protectable interest" in the embryo's life, not the intended parents.  That would represent a major change in reproductive law, and one that would not be in the best interests of our constituents.

In the end, RESOLVE concluded that the proposed changes to the language were not adequate to protect Virginia citizens who may face infertility now or in the future from the far-reaching consequences of embryo personhood under law, and we conveyed our conclusion to the person who approached us.  For this reason, RESOLVE continues to oppose HB1 and we urge those with infertility -- and anyone who cares about people with infertility -- to contact your Senator, use social media, and help us oppose and defeat HB1.