Michigan Supreme Court to Deliberate on Unique Custody Battle Over Frozen Embryo
The Michigan Supreme Court is set to hear a case that delves into the complex intersection of family law and reproductive rights. At the center of the dispute is a frozen embryo, the last remaining link between a divorced couple, Sarah Marie Markiewicz and David Markiewicz.
This case, while rooted in property division, raises unique questions about the nature of embryos in legal terms. Liisa Speaker, chair of the Family Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan, explains, “In Michigan, embryos are treated as property and other states are treating embryos as property as well. But there’s also a recognition that this property is special property because it has the potential to become life.”
The dispute involves Sarah Marie Markiewicz, who is seeking custody of the frozen embryo, viewing it as potentially her last opportunity to have more children. She highlights the biological connection the embryo has with her current children and references the Michigan Reproductive Rights Amendment as part of her argument.
Conversely, David Markiewicz contends that he does not wish to father another child with his ex-wife, asserting his rights as the person most biologically tied to the embryo. The Michigan Court of Appeals sided with David in a divided decision, affirming the Macomb County Circuit Court’s ruling.
The majority opinion noted, “The trial court appreciated the special characteristic of the embryo to produce a human life, but ultimately sided with David because it would be more inequitable to have Sarah birth a child with David’s DNA against his wishes, as opposed to the inequity Sarah would suffer by being precluded from birthing a child that does not share her DNA.”
Judge Michael Riordan, dissenting, pointed to the couple’s agreement with the IVF clinic, which implied an intention to proceed with a pregnancy. He wrote in his dissent, “The contractual language between the parties clearly provides that plaintiff’s and defendant’s intention is to have the embryo at issue, as well as any other embryos, transferred to plaintiff’s uterus at some point in the future.”
This legal battle emerges in the wake of Michigan’s new assisted reproduction and surrogate parenting law, enacted on April 1, which lifted the ban on paid surrogacy and clarified rights in surrogacy agreements. However, the law is silent on resolving disputes over embryos post-divorce.
Liisa Speaker noted the potential impact of the court’s decision, saying, “This is going to come up a lot more in Michigan.” The outcome could set a precedent for how similar cases are handled in the future, providing much-needed legal clarity.
—
Read More Michigan News
