Article: Great Victory For Man Against Ex

[logicallefty]

Arizona woman must donate embryos frozen before cancer, needs ex-husband's consent to become pregnant

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a woman – who has since become infertile after surviving an aggressive form of cancer – may not use the embryos she had frozen before treatment to have a baby without her ex-husband’s consent and must donate them instead.

www.foxnews.com

- Woman has cancer
- She and Hubby have eggs fertilized and stored before treatment
- Contract signed that both parties must conscent to use eggs he fertilized
- Hubby becomes ExHubby (shock)
- ExHubby says he no longer wants kids he would be financially responsible for
- Woman fights it, wants to use eggs anyway
- Arizona Supreme Court sides with HIM

Look at the comments too. Men are waking up!!!

 

[Who Dares Win]

Its impressive that we are surprised that a court didnt side with the wrong part, nowadays in such cases justice is a revolutionary act.

Btw cant see the comments, where are them?

 

[logicallefty]

Its impressive that we are surprised that a court didnt side with the wrong part, nowadays in such cases justice is a revolutionary act.

Btw cant see the comments, where are them?

Scroll down and look for "Stories You May Like" and then the comments are a little down from that. I'm on a computer. Not sure how the page shows up on a phone. Sometimes Fox News disables comments but I just checked and they are still there.

 

[Who Dares Win]

Scroll down and look for "Stories You May Like" and then the comments are a little down from that. I'm on a computer. Not sure how the page shows up on a phone. Sometimes Fox News disables comments but I just checked and they are still there.

Im scrolling till the bottom but dont see either the stories or the comments, could be a limited content for users outside the states?

Can you copy and paste some?

 

[logicallefty]

Im scrolling till the bottom but dont see either the stories or the comments, could be a limited content for users outside the states?

Can you copy and paste some?

Sure. Here are a few.

-----------------------------
Contract law. Simple decision.
Reply
Share
Report
5 Likes

Wise man.
Reply
Share
Report

------------------------------

Glad to see Arizona making the right decision and not leaving the man's rights out in the cold like so many courts do every day when it comes to children.
Reply
Share
Report
19 Likes

And yet some stranger can have his babies? That's crazy.
Reply
Share
Report
7 Likes

--------------------------------

She signed a legal agreement, a contract, that says she needs his permission. He said no. End of story.
Reply
Share
Report
21 Likes

Except it's not. The embryos should be destroyed, not given to strangers.
Reply
Share
Report
3 Likes

----------------------------------

Sounds pretty straightforward. Count is enforcing the written contract she signed.
Reply
Share
Report
11 Likes

----------------------------------

The man may be responsible for support of the children. He has a right to decline. No matter what the law is today, someone will change it and make the guy responsible. I'm on his side of this argument.
Reply
Share
Report
22 Likes

-----------------------------------

If ex-husband is going to be tagged then YEA she should have to have his permission. Thank you AZ for common sense...
Reply
Share
Report
5 Likes

-----------------------------------

At 39 she's hitting the maximum range of natural unassisted fertility. And knowing the family courts if she used those embryos they would likely make the ex-husband responsible for child support.
Reply
Share
Report
2 Likes

She is already infertile because of the cancer treatments.
Reply
Share
Report
LOL!!! Women in their 60's have had children. It just takes a real man.
Reply
Share
Report
1 Like

------------------------------------

If she wants the eggs sign a legal contact voiding him of financial responsibilities...... oh yeah she won’t do that.
Reply
Share
Report
14 Likes

Wouldnt work out that way even if she did do that..
Reply
Share
Report
1 Like
That would not help. Child support is awarded to the child, not the mother. Any contract such as you described would make no difference, the father would still have to pay. That is established law.
Reply
Share
Report
2 Likes

 

[Serenity]

He would have been fvcked had there not been a written contract.