Widow granted permission to use suicide victim's sperm in IVF treatment
Supreme Court judge James Edelman made the decision following an urgent hearing late on Saturday evening.
The woman, whose name has been suppressed, had spent the past two years trying to conceive and recently began in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment when her husband, who suffered from severe bouts of depression, committed suicide.
Following his death on Friday, his body was taken to Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital where the woman, known only as Ms C, asked for his sperm to be removed and stored for future IVF procedures.
But her request was denied and she was told by officials at the hospital that she needed a court order.
In his decision Judge Edelman said by the time the woman contacted the court there were only a few hours left in the day but that in the short time he saw no reason why her request should not be granted.
He said the Human Tissue and Transplant Act allowed designated
officers at hospitals to grant such requests and called for any future
applications to be considered “with greater speed and efficiency” so
relatives would not have to endure a court hearing.
“The case before me involved circumstances of extreme urgency,” Judge Edelman said.
"Ms C was unrepresented. A decision needed to be made almost immediately. And I considered that there was a simpler legislative route to the orders that Ms C sought.
“The next section of my reasons explains how that legislation operates and why in future a hospital should be able to perform the desired procedure in a case like this almost immediately and without an applicant being required to come to court prior to removal.”
Under the Human Tissue and Transplant Act, a designated officer at a hospital (usually a senior doctor) may authorise a request from a next of kin for the removal of human tissue from a deceased person for medical procedures.
Judge Edelman said sperm fell under that scope.
The only restriction is when a person dies in sudden or suspicious circumstances.
In those cases permission needs to be given by the State Coroner who did not object to the sperm being removed and stored.
Because of the short turnaround time for the hearing, Judge Edelman said the Health Minister did not have an opportunity to appear at the proceeding.
He said the Minister would have an opportunity to be represented at any future hearing concerning the use of the sperm for IVF.
The woman, whose name has been suppressed, had spent the past two years trying to conceive and recently began in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment when her husband, who suffered from severe bouts of depression, committed suicide.
Following his death on Friday, his body was taken to Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital where the woman, known only as Ms C, asked for his sperm to be removed and stored for future IVF procedures.
But her request was denied and she was told by officials at the hospital that she needed a court order.
In his decision Judge Edelman said by the time the woman contacted the court there were only a few hours left in the day but that in the short time he saw no reason why her request should not be granted.
“The case before me involved circumstances of extreme urgency,” Judge Edelman said.
"Ms C was unrepresented. A decision needed to be made almost immediately. And I considered that there was a simpler legislative route to the orders that Ms C sought.
“The next section of my reasons explains how that legislation operates and why in future a hospital should be able to perform the desired procedure in a case like this almost immediately and without an applicant being required to come to court prior to removal.”
Under the Human Tissue and Transplant Act, a designated officer at a hospital (usually a senior doctor) may authorise a request from a next of kin for the removal of human tissue from a deceased person for medical procedures.
Judge Edelman said sperm fell under that scope.
The only restriction is when a person dies in sudden or suspicious circumstances.
In those cases permission needs to be given by the State Coroner who did not object to the sperm being removed and stored.
Because of the short turnaround time for the hearing, Judge Edelman said the Health Minister did not have an opportunity to appear at the proceeding.
He said the Minister would have an opportunity to be represented at any future hearing concerning the use of the sperm for IVF.
Comments
Post a Comment