This story is about a “frozen embryo” battle in a U.S. law court. It has two main characters.

Character 1: Sofía Margarita Vergara is an American actress of Colombian origin. She is reputed to be the highest paid and richest actress on U.S. television. She acts in the television series, Modern Family.

Character 2: Nick Loeb is a Florida-based businessman and son of a former U.S. diplomat and banker. He will be 41 years old this August. Nick has no children and is divorced from his Swedish-model wife.


Nick and Sofia

Nick and Sofia’s paths crossed and they began dating in 2010. By 2012 the gossip industry was abuzz that the couple’s relationship was falling apart. But in the same year the couple announced their engagement. However, by 2014, Nick and Sofia had gone their different ways. And, that was when this story began.

Sometime in 2013, Nick and Sofia decided that since their very hectic lives hardly gave them time to conceive and raise a baby, they would use modern technology to preserve her eggs for the future. They opted for in vitro fertilization technology to freeze their embryos. Then, Sofia told the world that “I wanted to make sure I already froze some eggs so, you know, I wanted to take advantage of the science and why not?”

When the couple split almost a year later, what to do with the frozen embryos (for two girls) became problematic. In a nutshell, Nick wanted to proceed and grow their two babies, but Sofia who had become engaged to actor, Joe Manganiello, was not entertaining the idea of having her former boyfriend’s baby.

Matters rose to unanticipated heights when Nick went to court incognito to have it declare that he could have the embryos implanted in a surrogate mother and have the babies. But his cover was blown and the issue became public. That was when it became known that Nick and Sofia had entered into a legal agreement over the frozen embryos. The agreement stipulated, among other things, that “no unilateral action can be taken with regard to the embryos unless both parties consent.”

Sofia has not come out to say that she wants embryos destroyed. Neither does she want the process of having the embryos become babies to commence. She just wants the situation to remain as it is. Nick says that he is determined to have the embryos grown to life.

“I asked her (Sofia) to let me have the embryos, offering to pay for all expenses to carry our girls to term and raise them (but) she has refused,” he says.

A child needs a mother

The issue is not about money because Sofia has plenty of it. She told an interview that she has an “embryo” contract with Nick and there was no way he could unilaterally do anything about it. Besides, she contends that “a child needs a mother. More than a mother, it needs a loving relationship of parents that get along, that don’t hate each other …” She added that “it would be so selfish” to bring a child into the world where both parents were already at loggerheads and would not provide a good environment to nurture it.

Sofia’s attorney added his voice to the dispute some weeks ago when he released a statement claiming that his client “has never wanted to destroy her embryos…Vergara, who has happily moved on with her life, is content to leave the embryos frozen indefinitely as she has no desire to have children with her ex, which should be understandable given the circumstances.”

This idea of letting the embryos be put under lid in perpetuity is part of what irks Nick. He put his thoughts this way in a newspaper article he wrote on the matter: “Many have asked me: Why not just move on and have family of your own? I have every intention of doing so. But that doesn’t mean I should let the two lives I have already created be destroyed or sit in a freezer until the end of time.”

Nick, a self-declared Catholic and a Republican by political party affiliation, raised another issue in his article. According to him, “When we create embryos for the purpose of life, should we not define them as life, rather than as property? Does one person’s desire to avoid biological parenthood (free of any legal obligations) outweigh another’s religious beliefs in the sanctity of life and desire to be a parent?

“A woman is entitled to bring a pregnancy to term even if the man objects. Shouldn’t a man who is willing to take on all parental responsibilities be similarly entitled to bring his embryos to term even if the woman objects? These are issues that, unlike abortion, have nothing to do with the rights over one’s own body, and everything to do with a parent’s right to protect the life of his or her unborn child.”

No one can predict how the court will rule on this matter. But, if precedents are things to go by, eight largely similar cases have been thrown out by the courts on previous occasions. Nick is undaunted. He wants to fight on, even as Sofia is busy with wedding arrangements with her new man, Joe, to whom she is now engaged.

While Nick and Sofia play their “embryo” games, some voices on medical ethics are being raised that this form of battle is what results when the rich and powerful continue to use modern technology to toy around with conception and human life.

Reader
http://localhost/

This their case is one of the most interesting of recent times. Following the events closely. Hmm

There's not much of middle ground for them to meet each other halfway without one of them consenting to be a parent against her will or the other not being the parent that he wants to be.

Fela Called it stalmate, thats what I call it too.

thiss matter is really getting outta hand

Hahaha.....most interesting case ever.....

Now we are free...Now we are not....

cococandy:
This their case is one of the most interesting of recent times. Following the events closely. Hmm

There's not much of middle ground for them to meet each other halfway without one of them consenting to be a parent against her will or the other not being the parent that he wants to be.

i tell you!!

fromnigeria:
Fela Called it stalmate, thats what I call it too.

A stalemate indeed. But nawa o, frozen embryo! I thought we were at the level of frozen egg

Do like I did!

Make sure the man's signature is not on ANY of those documents!!!
Simple.

Yeye woman!

Rule #1 NO CODITION IS PERMANENT!!!!

Especially with matrimonial sperm-donors!

cococandy:
This their case is one of the most interesting of recent times. Following the events closely. Hmm

There's not much of middle ground for them to meet each other halfway without one of them consenting to be a parent against her will or the other not being the parent that he wants to be.

But will the embryos be frozen till eternity? The case strong no be lie

soonest:

But will the embryos be frozen till eternity? The case strong no be lie

i dunno o.

I'm wondering why they didn't just leave it as sperm and egg cells. There would certainly be no issues about any party discarding theirs if they didn't want to have a child anymore. They had to go ahead and create embryos.

cococandy:
i dunno o.

I'm wondering why they didn't just leave it as sperm and egg cells. There would certainly be no issues about any party discarding theirs if they didn't want to have a child anymore. They had to go ahead and create embryos.

This is even my first time of hearing frozen embryo. IMHO, the woman should just soft-pedal. The man needs those children badly. But really like Kanwuliajara said no condition is permanent. I guess when they were making the decision in love, they didn't know a time like this will arise.