European Court of Human Rights Refuses Natallie Evans the Right to Use Her Frozen Embryos
Frozen Embryos case
12/04/2007
The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) today delivered its verdict in the case of Natallie Evans and refused her the right to use her stored frozen embryos.
Today’s judgment by the Grand Chamber follows the appeal by Natallie to the ECtHR which took place on 22 November 2006 in front of seventeen judges.
Natallie, who had six embryos frozen after being treated for ovarian cancer in 2001, had fought a lengthy battle to win the right to use her stored frozen embryos to have a baby, after her ex-fiance, Howard Johnston, withdrew his consent.
Natallie’s solicitor, Muiris Lyons of law firm Irwin Mitchell said after the decision was announced today: “Natallie is bitterly disappointed and hugely upset by this decision. This was her last chance to become a mother and it now appears likely that, unless Mr Johnson changes his mind, the embryos will be destroyed.”
“Natallie has shown great courage and determination throughout this battle. All she has ever asked for is the chance to use her embryos to bring her own child into the world. It is a great tragedy that the law prevents her from achieving this simple goal. Her legal fight is now over. Her sad loss will remain forever.”
Natallie Evans said: “I am distraught at the court’s decision today, it’s very hard for me to accept that the embryos will now be destroyed and that I will never become a mother. I would ask Howard to consider whether he could ever permit me to have the children I so dearly long for, and which he was happy to consent to when the procedure took place to create these embryos.”
Background to the case
In 2000 Natallie and her then fiancé Howard Johnston began fertility treatment at the Bath Assisted Conception Clinic, but in October 2001 she was diagnosed with a pre-cancerous condition of her ovaries. In November 2001 the couple were treated at the clinic and six embryos created, Natallie later had an operation to remove her ovaries. She was told she would have to wait for two years before implanting the embryos.
In May 2002 Howard ended their relationship. Natallie still wished to use the embryos as they represented her last chance of having a natural child of her own. Howard however withdrew his consent and refused permission, which the UK law requires before they can be used. The clinic where the embryos were stored considered they had no choice other then to destroy the embryos.
Natallie applied to the Family Division of the High Court to obtain an order that she be permitted to use the embryos. She argued that Howard had already consented to the creation, storage and use of the embryos and that it was unfair for him to be allowed to change his mind.
Natallie was unsuccessful both in the High Court and subsequently in the Court of Appeal. The judges ruled that the HFEA 1990 was clear. Both parties must consent to the use of the embryos - Howard was entitled to withdraw his consent at any time before they were used. He was able to change his mind even if it had such tragic consequences for Natallie.
Natallie petitioned the House of Lords in an effort to overturn the decision of the Court of Appeal but the House of Lords decided they would not hear her case.
On the 14th of February 2005 Natallie applied to the ECtHR asking the court to consider whether the UK law, which then required her six stored embryos to be destroyed, was a breach of her human rights.
The ECtHR in Strasbourg heard Natallie’s plea in September 2005. In March 2006 the ECtHR ruled that this was not a breach of Natallie’s human rights. Seven Judges heard Natallie’s case. Two found in favour of Natallie, and five ruled against her.
Natallie then lodged an appeal. She made her final plea on 22nd November 2006 in the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in front of seventeen Judges, who then decided the fate of the embryos, announcing their decision today.
Natallie contended that by depriving her of the opportunity to use her stored embryos to have a natural child of her own the UK law, laid down in the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (HFEA) 1990, breached her human rights under the European Convention on Human Rights. In particular Natallie contended that her rights to respect for her private and family life (Article 8) and not to be discriminated against (Article 14) have been breached.