E-Paper
Kerala HC nod to extract, preserve gametes of critically ill man
The petitioner said that she wanted to cryopreserve her husband’s gametes in order to bear a child through an ART treatment.
The Kerala high court has allowed the extraction and preservation of a critically injured man’s sperm without his written consent in order for his wife to conceive through an Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) procedure.
In a petition filed in the high court on, the 34-year-old woman said that her husband (36)wasadmitted in a private medical facility and his condition was deteriorating. The petitioner said that she wanted to cryopreserve her husband’s gametes in order to bear a child through an ART treatment but was unable to do it as she did not have his written consent. The couple doesn’t have any children.
The man suffered serious injuries in a road accident and was currently on ventilator support, the women’s counsel said, adding that the chances of his survival were bleak.
Section 22 of the ART (Regulation) Act, 2021, mandates a “written informed consent from all the parties” for all the steps linked to an ART procedure, including the extraction and preservation of gametes.
“The clinics and banks shall not cryopreserve any human embryos or gamete, without specific instructions and consent in writing from all the parties seeking assisted reproductive technology,” according to the act.
The woman said that she was unable get her husband’s written consent due to his critical medical condition, and sought the court’s direction for the cryopreservation of his gametes. She added in the plea that if the “if the matter was delayed any further, the worst may happen”.
In an order, justice VG Arun said the petitioner has submitted that there is no possibility of getting a written consent from her husband due to his medical condition and no statutory provision exists in act to deal with such an issue. It also noted that the hospital in which the man was admitted had the requisite license to preserve the man’s gametes.
“Taking the above factors into consideration, and being guided by equity in the absence of an enabling statutory provision, I find the 1st petitioner (wife) to be entitled for the interim relief sought. Hence, the 5th respondent (hospital) is permitted to extract the gametes of X (husband) and cryopreserve the same for use by the 1st petitioner,” the court said in its order issued on August 16 and made public on Wednesday.
The court, however, added that other than extraction and preservation of the gametes, no further step should be undertaken without its permission.
