What legal consequences would someone face for intentionally destroying an embryo conceived via IVF but not yet implanted?
<p>A random debate somewhere else made me curious about this question.  If someone knowingly and intentionally destroyed an embryo conceived via IVF but not implanted yet what kind of consequences do they face?  Is the potential life treated differently or is this just destruction of property?</p>
<p>Is there any state where someone doing this would potentially face manslaughter or murder charges, due to some variant of a 'life starts at conception' anti abortion law?</p>

<blockquote>
<p>Is there any state where someone doing this would potentially face
manslaughter or murder charges, due to some variant of a 'life starts
at conception' anti abortion law?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Not really. Those laws are currently unconstitutional. A state could certainly prescribe some criminal punishment in a case like this one, but punishing under existing manslaughter or murder laws would almost surely not be upheld under existing law (subject to change without advanced notice by the U.S. Supreme Court).</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If someone knowingly and intentionally destroyed an embryo conceived
via IVF but not implanted yet what kind of consequences do they face?
Is the potential life treated differently or is this just destruction
of property?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This is a tough question that probably doesn't have a uniform answer under the law of all U.S. states.</p>
<p>For one thing, it isn't clear who, if anyone, has property rights in the embryo. It is certainly conceivable that a state might instead conclude that the donor receiving the IVF treatment has only contract rights in it (and breach of a contract is not a crime).</p>
<p>It might be viewed as a property destruction case. There might be a specific statute on point. There might be a civil lawsuit remedy. In most states, this would be an issue of first impression and a court would look a competing ways that cases had been handled in other jurisdictions to decide what to do in its case.</p>

<p>I will take Texas as my example of current law against abortion. First, &quot;abortion&quot; is defined in <a href="https://statutes.capitol.texas.gov/Docs/HS/htm/HS.245.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Health and Safety Code 245</a> as</p>
<blockquote>
<p>the act of using or prescribing an instrument, a drug, a medicine, or
any other substance, device, or means with the intent <em>to cause the
death of an unborn child of a woman known to be pregnant</em>.  The term
does not include birth control devices or oral contraceptives.  An act
is not an abortion if the act is done with the intent to:</p>
<p>(A)  save the life or preserve the health of an unborn child;</p>
<p>(B)  remove a dead, unborn child whose death was caused by spontaneous
abortion; or</p>
<p>(C)  remove an ectopic pregnancy.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>(emphasis added). Let us assume that no possibly relevant woman is pregnant. Accordingly, destruction of a fertilized egg is not an abortion. <a href="https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/87R/billtext/html/HB01280I.htm" rel="nofollow noreferrer">The prohibition made possible</a> due to the fall of Roe v. Wade (§170A.002) is that &quot;(a) A person may not knowingly perform, induce, or attempt an abortion&quot; (with some exceptions)&quot;.</p>
<p>It is possible that a zealous prosecutor would prosecute the person who disposes of an embryo, if the egg donor happens to be pregnant at the time (note the wording of the statute). While it has been a widely maintained political position that striking down Roe v. Wade would not have an effect on IVF, there is no specific Texas law permitting disposal of in vitro fertilized embryos.</p>

united-states criminal-law