This BLOG Sidesteps Travel a Bit to Deal with Everything Else!

Page 1: Alabama’s Frozen Embryos Are “Children!”

Page 2: Where’s Kate Middleton & What’s William Doing Now?

Setting Things Straight: 

Alabama’s Frozen Embryos Are “Children!”

The State of Alabama has decreed that frozen fertilized human eggs on hold for implementation in a woman’s uterus are, actually, children.  The legislators in Alabama may be finding some religious reason in some religion, one that approves of In Vitro Fertilization,  even though the concept of Separation of Church and State should prevent  that from  happening,  to approve of this definition of what is a “child.”  They may think this is a sound idea even though there are those whose religion dictates that life begins when a baby is born and can sustain its life outside of the womb. 

Regardless of your views on when life begins, I am fascinated by the wider implications, politically and economically, of the ripple effect of such a law. Please note that I am not a Constitutional Lawyer nor am I a CPA or financial advisor on any level, especially since I have always found balancing my checkbook a serious challenge. . . even though I was an “A” calculus student and my professor was Dr. Banesch Hoffman, who worked at Princeton with Albert Einstein and for whom a mathematics metal is named and awarded at my alma mater, Queens College of the City University of New York. (Note: if you click on the link above, I was  a student in the  special Math 3 course Dr. Hoffmann taught described in the Wikipedia entry! Go me! I was so lucky to have been in that one-semester advanced math course that satisfied the requirement for one year of mathematics and to have experienced his teaching approach, knowledge, skill and pressure to learn and succeed!).

But I digress!  Not unusual for me.

So let’s look at the economic and unique opportunities for all who have frozen embryos in storage in Alabama. . .and what could happen in Federal Law embraced this concept:

1. Owners of eggs are responsible for payments, in perpetuity, to  support these “children.” That means that  the  “parent(s”) must pay fees to support each “child” and the “walking-around-children” of these parents , as well as their children may inherit the financial obligation of supporting these frozen eggs if it is considered manslaughter or murder to dispose of unused/unwanted eggs.
2. When women engage in in vitro fertilization (IVF), on average, twelve (12) fertilized eggs are frozen to help to  assure a good chance that  one of  the frozen eggs will germinate once implanted in the woman’s uterus.  Given that  these 12 fertilized eggs are deemed to be “children” in Alabama, the owner of the eggs that are being financially supported are also the ‘parent(s)’ of  the  eggs.  That should mean that,  at least in Alabama, anyone with eggs in storage there should be able to take each frozen egg as a dependent on their state income tax filing.  Multiply the number of deductions a woman or a couple could deduct fromtheir state income tax filing by the amount of allowable deduction per child. That could be named a Taxpayer’s Delight!  If the concept were adopted by the IRS,  a parent of frozen “children” could, on average, multiply the $2000 deduction allowed per dependent child for most people by 12, a hefty deduction of $24,000! Not bad! A wonderful tax deduction might encourage people to store as many eggs as possible even if they don’t want to get pregnant! Imagine  storing 100 eggs and keeping your warehouse of frozen eggs at that level, replenishing any you might use or might barter or sell (now there’s an idea!) while taking a hefty $200,000 deduction on Federal Income Tax should a law enabling frozen eggs to count as children come to pass. That’s a better tax-dodging shelter than most.
3. It seems logical that, while there  are limits to the age and conditions under which a “child” is no longer defined as a “dependent,” the IVF frozen “child” does not age-out  of “childhood” until it is inserted in a womb, rejected by the uterus or grows into what  is generally referred to as a fetus and ultimately as a live-birth.  If the parent(s) do not “use” all of the frozen eggs in the process of delivering a naturally breathing child, the remaining frozen “children,” under Alabama law, as it’s explained to me, cannot be destroyed or disposed  of which leads me to believe that:
4. (Destroying unused eggs intentionally would be considered murder, and
5. Destruction of eggs by accident could be considered manslaughter or, maybe reckless endangerment or, at least, negligent homicide (I’ve watched too many episodes of Law & Order!) or child abuse.
6. Likewise, if  there were a power outage during which generators were not able to keep the environment in which the eggs were stored  at their sub-zero conditions to protect the embryo from defrosting or, for  that  matter, from  developing “freezer burn” when the  higher temperature reached during the power outage  plunges to the proper sub-zero temperature when the power returns,  the parent(s), one would logically  think, and the “frozen-child-care” facility could be found guilty of child abuse, neglect, reckless endangerment, manslaughter and/or murder depending on the level of harm done which one might not be able to determine if  that egg were never implanted  and given the opportunity  to become what  one normally thinks  of  as the  definition of a “child.”
7. If the costs involved in the IVF process result in a person’s or couple’s available  income resources plunging to  the poverty level, it seems logical that  this household should be entitled to welfare assistance. . .do they do that in Alabama?? . . . and all of the  services one  would expect to assist a household with, say, twelve children.  Since these “children” have  a lifespan that the Vatican would define as “eternity,” unless embedded in a uterus, they will each be considered “minors” forever and, therefore, defined as dependent children. We call this “a CPA’s Delight.”

While I am not an attorney nor an accountant or financial advisor, be sure  to  check with all of these professionals before moving to Alabama to stake your  claim to a gold mine. But I would be very interested in comments from Legal Eagles and CPAs  as well as Civil Rights attorneys regarding the implications of the  Alabama law. I’m interested in your feedback and loopholes you note that could be worth a fortune to someone who knows how to work the system.

Lastly, where does any government, municipal, state or federal level in the US have to right  to get into the business of defining when life begins? How does that even become a legal conversation? And why does a male-dominated governmental system have so much interest in what goes on in a woman’s uterus, outside of the obvious sexual implications. How about all y’all go  golfing and spend your  time chasing  your  balls across the  putting greens. “Putts” seems to be a good word for those thrilled with this legal concept to focus on and  for brevity, in the future, we can  abbreviate that word to “PUTZ.” It seems fitting.