Michigan Supreme Court declines to intervene in frozen embryo dispute between divorced couple
The Michigan Supreme Court has refused to issue a ruling in the case of a frozen embryo created years ago by a now-divorced couple, stating that the legislature should give direction on what to do.
The Supreme Court took that stance in an order signed and entered Friday. The case had gone to oral hearing April 9 on an effort to appeal a Dec. 7, 2023, judgement in the Court of Appeals.
"We are not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this court," the state justices said in the brief joint statement.
The case – Sarah Marie Markiewicz v. David Randal Markiewicz – was an appeal to a divorce ruling. The two were married in 2009 and had four children during their marriage. Three of the children were conceived by in vitro fertilization. There was one remaining cryogenically preserved human embryo, conceived by IVF, remaining when the couple divorced in 2020.
Court documents explain that while Sarah Markiewicz wanted to potentially have another child in the future, David Markiewicz did not.
Other options, should they agree, would include:
- Donating the embryo to another couple.
- Donating the embryo for scientific training.
- Following standard procedures for disposing of the embryo.
"The facts in this matter are unique and do not present a good vehicle to address the weighty issues arising from in vitro fertilization and the human embryos created in the process," Michigan Justice Brian K. Zahra wrote in a concurring statement included with the Supreme Court order. "This question implicates some of the most perplexing debates in society, invoking deep-seated and conflicting beliefs about morality, ethics, religion, human life, and personal autonomy."
In some cases, Zahra explained, the courts have treated embryos as a special category of marital property to be divided by agreement or decision. However, not all jurisdictions consider embryos to be property at all.
"Whether embryos should be treated as property or as persons with independent interests and whether control over embryos' fates should be granted in divorce on the basis of a preexisting contract, an equitable decision of a court, child custody law, or some other method are matters best understood as legislative question," Zahra wrote. "I call on the Legislature to address these issues and not abdicate its policymaking function to this Court through inaction."
