Supreme Court Declines to Hear Alabama IVF Case

Baxley Maniscalco Injury, Family, & Estate Attorneys

Bronze statue of Lady Justice (Themis) holding balanced scales, wearing a blindfold, with elegant drapery and classical design, displayed in a courtroom or legal setting with soft window light in the background.

Table of Contents

The case began in 2021, when Felicia Burdick-Aysenne and Scott Aysenne filed a lawsuit against the Mobile-based Center for Reproductive Medicine.

The couple alleged wrongful death and negligence after a patient at the hospital housing the clinic gained unauthorized access to the cryogenic embryo storage area, removed several embryos, and dropped them on the floor, including the couple’s one remaining embryo.

A state trial judge initially dismissed the couple’s wrongful death claim. However, in February 2024, the Alabama Supreme Court overturned that decision, ruling that under Alabama’s Wrongful Death of a Minor Act, “unborn children are ‘children'” even outside the womb. This interpretation allowed the couple’s lawsuit seeking monetary damages to proceed.

The ruling sent immediate shockwaves through Alabama’s medical community, prompting many IVF providers across the state to suspend fertility treatments out of fear of legal liability.

The Supreme Court Decision

On October 7, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the Center for Reproductive Medicine’s appeal. The clinic had argued that the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision violated its constitutional right to due process under the 14th Amendment.

In its petition to the nation’s highest court, the clinic warned that the state ruling was “subjecting providers of critical reproductive services to the possibility of unprecedented punitive damages for the virtually inevitable loss of some fertilized eggs or eventual destruction of unused embryos.”

The Supreme Court’s decision not to take the case effectively allows the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling to stand, maintaining the legal definition of embryos as children under Alabama state law.

Alabama’s Legislative Response

Following the public and medical community’s reaction to the February 2024 ruling, Alabama’s legislature moved quickly to address concerns about IVF access.

In March 2024, the Republican-led legislature passed a law providing immunity from criminal charges or civil claims to IVF providers. Governor Kay Ivey signed the bill into law shortly thereafter.

However, according to the Center for Reproductive Medicine’s Supreme Court petition, this new law—despite applying retroactively—does not fully protect the clinic from the wrongful death lawsuit at the center of this controversy.

The limited protection offered by the new legislation has created a complex legal landscape for both IVF providers and families in Alabama.

Legal Implications for Alabama Families

For Alabama families currently using or considering IVF, the Supreme Court’s decision to let the state ruling stand creates several important legal considerations:

Medical Decision Documentation: Families undergoing IVF in Alabama now face increased importance in documenting all medical decisions regarding embryo creation, storage, and disposal.
Informed Consent: The ruling potentially changes what constitutes informed consent in IVF procedures, requiring more detailed discussions about the legal status of embryos.
Estate Planning Implications: With embryos legally considered children in Alabama, questions arise about whether they should be addressed in wills and other estate planning documents.
Interstate Treatment Considerations: Some Alabama residents may consider obtaining IVF treatment in neighboring states with different legal frameworks to avoid potential complications.
Insurance and Coverage Questions: The ruling raises questions about whether insurance policies covering wrongful death might now extend to frozen embryos in certain circumstances.

The situation creates particular uncertainty for families who already have frozen embryos stored at Alabama facilities.

Many are now weighing difficult decisions about whether to transfer embryos to facilities in other states or make other arrangements.

An infographic illustrating the legal implications for Alabama families after the Supreme Court ruling.

Impact on Fertility Clinics

Despite the limited immunity granted by the state legislature, Alabama fertility clinics continue to face significant challenges:

Liability Concerns: While protected from some claims, clinics remain concerned about the scope of potential liability for embryo loss under various circumstances.
Operational Changes: Many clinics have implemented stricter security measures and handling protocols to minimize the risk of accidents or unauthorized access.
Insurance Costs: Medical malpractice and other liability insurance costs for fertility clinics in Alabama have reportedly increased substantially since the February 2024 ruling.
Patient Communication: Clinics are developing new communication protocols to ensure patients understand the legal ramifications of all decisions regarding embryo creation and storage.

Some fertility specialists have expressed concern that these factors collectively may lead to higher costs and reduced access to fertility services for Alabama families.

An infographic illustrating how the Supreme Court's ruling affects fertility clinics in Alabama.

Wrongful Death Claims in Alabama

The intersection of IVF treatment and Alabama’s unique wrongful death statute creates a legal landscape unlike that in most other states.

Understanding these distinctions is crucial for families considering legal action:

Punitive Focus: Unlike most states, Alabama’s wrongful death statute is entirely punitive rather than compensatory, meaning damages are designed to punish wrongdoers rather than compensate families for their loss.
Wrongful Death of a Minor Act: This specific statute, central to the Alabama Supreme Court’s ruling, now applies to embryos as well as born children under state precedent.
Statute of Limitations: In Alabama, wrongful death claims generally must be filed within two years of the date of death, requiring timely action by affected families.
Standing Requirements: Only the personal representative of the deceased’s estate can file a wrongful death lawsuit in Alabama, a procedural requirement that adds complexity to these cases.

The Burdick-Aysenne case represents new legal territory, potentially establishing precedents for how damages are calculated and what constitutes negligence in the handling of frozen embryos.

How Baxley Maniscalco Can Help

For Alabama families navigating the complex aftermath of the Supreme Court’s decision not to intervene in this case, experienced legal guidance is essential.

At Baxley Maniscalco, our attorneys understand the unique aspects of Alabama’s wrongful death statute and the evolving legal landscape surrounding reproductive medicine.

We can assist families facing challenges related to:

Evaluating potential claims related to improper handling of embryos or other fertility treatment complications.
Understanding how Alabama’s new IVF immunity law may affect your specific situation.
Navigating the procedural requirements for wrongful death claims in Alabama.
Developing comprehensive family formation plans that account for the legal status of embryos.
Creating estate planning documents that address all aspects of your family’s needs.

Our compassionate approach recognizes the deeply personal nature of these issues while providing the strategic legal guidance needed to protect your family’s rights and interests.

Contact us today.