The Role of Reproductive Effort in the Resolution of Frozen Embryo
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON Faculty of Business, Law and Art School of Law The Role of Reproductive Effort in the Resolution of Frozen Embryo Disputes: An Analysis of Equity, Property and Rights in this Context by Alexander Chrysanthou BSc (Hons), LLB (Hons) Thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2017 i UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON ABSTRACT FACULTY OF BUSINESS, LAW AND ART School of Law Doctor of Philosophy THE ROLE OF REPRODUCTIVE EFFORT IN THE RESOLUTION OF FROZEN EMBRYO DISPUTES: AN ANALYSIS OF EQUITY, PROPERTY AND RIGHTS IN THIS CONTEXT by Alexander Chrysanthou Frozen embryo disputes have been described as cases requiring the ‘wisdom of Solomon’ due to the difficulty in assessing the potentially competing interests of gamete providers following IVF treatment and the breakdown of their relationship. A legal framework modelled on ‘reproductive effort’ could inform how authority over the disposition decisions of frozen embryo(s) should be allocated in such disputes. This thesis considers how ‘reproductive effort’ could be applied under three different areas of law by which frozen embryo disputes have previously been settled, namely: estoppel, property law and a rights-based regime. A specific application of ‘reproductive effort’ in all three of these areas of law highlights the importance of the investment made by the female partner which, it is argued, in most circumstances, should grant her decisional authority over the disposition of any existing embryo(s). Whichever legal model is employed, it can be tailored (by regulation, statute or by application in case law) to more adequately recognise the gendered role ‘reproductive effort’ plays in IVF. ii Contents Table of Cases .................................................................................................................... vi Legislation ......................................................................................................................... xii Declaration of Authorship ................................................................................................ xiii Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... xiv Chapter 1: Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Background and overview of legislation and regulation in the UK .............................. 3 1.3 Frozen embryo disputes ............................................................................................ 6 1.3.1 Issues at stake ............................................................................................................ 10 1.4 Reproductive effort ................................................................................................. 12 1.5 The key legal issue in Evans: Consent ....................................................................... 14 1.6 Synopsis and scope ................................................................................................. 17 1.6.1 Scope and status of the embryo .................................................................................. 19 1.6.1.1 Article 2 of the ECHR ................................................................................................... 23 Chapter 2: An Assessment of the Use of Estoppel in Resolving Frozen Embryo Disputes ..... 26 2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 26 2.2 Overview of estoppel in Evans ................................................................................. 29 2.3 Hypothetical application of estoppel in frozen embryo disputes and remedies ........ 33 2.3.1 Promissory Estoppel ................................................................................................... 33 2.3.2 The approach of proprietary estoppel ......................................................................... 34 2.3.3 Comparisons and distinctions on estoppels ................................................................. 36 2.4 Clear promises, representations and reliance .......................................................... 38 2.4.1 Intention and risk ....................................................................................................... 40 2.4.2 The circumstantial component .................................................................................... 43 2.4.3 Implied representations .............................................................................................. 46 2.4.4 Silence ....................................................................................................................... 49 2.5 Does the availability of egg freezing affect her reliance on his assurances? .............. 53 2.6 Unconscionability .................................................................................................... 59 2.6.1 Unconscionability and a comparison with prenuptial agreements ................................ 60 2.6.2 Unconscionability and expectations ............................................................................ 67 2.7 Gender reflections ................................................................................................... 70 Chapter 3: The Use of Detriment in Resolving Frozen Embryo Disputes .............................. 72 3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 72 iii 3.2 Detriment to the female gamete provider seeking implantation in law .................... 77 3.2.1 Detriment to the female gamete provider in reality ..................................................... 80 3.2.2 Foregone work ........................................................................................................... 90 3.2.3 Detriment of (repeated) failed IVF cycles ..................................................................... 91 3.2.4 Detriment for older women ........................................................................................ 92 3.3 Detriment to the male gamete provider seeking implantation ......................................... 94 3.4 Detriment to gamete providers not seeking implantation................................................ 97 3.5 Conclusions on estoppel ................................................................................................. 97 Chapter 4: An Assessment of the Use of Property Law in Resolving Frozen Embryo Disputes ....................................................................................................................................... 101 4.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 101 4.2 Theories of property.............................................................................................. 104 4.2.1 Lockean theories and property .................................................................................. 104 4.2.2 Marxism and property .............................................................................................. 106 4.2.3 Utilitarianism and property ....................................................................................... 107 4.3 IVF as ‘reproductive labour’ ................................................................................... 108 4.3.1 Reproductive labour in IVF in the context of property law ......................................... 114 4.4 Right to exclude .................................................................................................... 116 4.5 Embryos as property ............................................................................................. 117 4.6 Controlling and using embryos .............................................................................. 119 4.7 Quasi-property ...................................................................................................... 122 4.8 The example of surrogacy ...................................................................................... 123 4.9 The example of gamete donation .......................................................................... 128 4.10 Further gendered differences in reproductive labour ............................................. 130 4.11 Further implications of the application of property law to IVF ................................ 133 4.12 Public policy .......................................................................................................... 138 4.13 Further considerations on the distribution of frozen embryos ................................ 143 4.13.1 Joint distribution on the basis of genetic material...................................................... 146 4.14 Conclusions on property ........................................................................................ 148 Chapter 5: An Assessment of a Rights-Based Approach to Resolving Frozen Embryo Disputes ....................................................................................................................................... 151 5.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 151 5.2 Evans and Article 8 ...............................................................................................