|
|
|
|
|
|
by LeafItAlone
852 days ago
|
|
|
> The ONLY questioned answered by the court is: Does this law apply to unborn children? No. The very beginning of the opinion: > This Court has long held that unborn children are "children" for purposes of Alabama's Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, § 6-5-391, Ala. Code 1975, a statute that allows parents of a deceased child to recover punitive damages for their child's death. The central question presented in these consolidated appeals, which involve the death of embryos kept in a cryogenic nursery, is whether the Act contains an unwritten exception to that rule for extrauterine children -- that is, unborn children who are located outside of a biological uterus at the time they are killed. Under existing black-letter law, the answer to that question is no: the Wrongful Death of a Minor Act applies to all unborn children, regardless of their location. |
|
|
The circumstances of the case, that is that it involves death of embryos kept in a cryogenic nursery, is not material to the validity of the argument.
They did not say: even if they are embryos. They said all unborn children.
This does not mean embryos ARE children. That was not what was argued nor what the court decided upon. You are inferring meaning outside the scope of the ruling. They side stepped the part you are upset about. They are very, very clear that this is about unborn children. The word embryos only appear once - while discussing the surround context, not the finding of the court or the question they were answering.