NYTimes op-ed illustrates misguided view of a “right” to reproduce

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

In a recent New York Times editorial, Sarah Richards raised some provocative questions as to whether fertility treatment should be covered in divorce settlements. In her op-ed “Alimony for Eggs,” Richards profiles a New Jersey couple where the wife’s lawyer is arguing that the husband should pay $20,000 towards the wife’s egg freezing and storage costs. The argument, according to the attorney, is that fertility treatment was a part of the marital lifestyle and therefore, “should be maintained as much as possible post-divorce.”

Much of this type of thinking—and behavior—comes from a misguided view that seems to dominate our current thinking on these matters.

Read the full, original story here: FERTILITY ALIMONY?

 

Outbreak Featured
Infographic: Gene transfer mystery — How 'antifreeze' genes jumped from one species to another without sex

Infographic: Gene transfer mystery — How ‘antifreeze’ genes jumped from one species to another without sex

It isn’t surprising... that herrings and smelts, two groups of fish that commonly roam the northernmost reaches of the Atlantic ...
a bee covered in pollen x

Are GMOs and pesticides threatening bees?

First introduced in 1995, neonicotinoids ...
glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

* indicates required
Email Lists
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.