Jump to content

Australian widow granted right to harvest dead husband’s sperm


Recommended Posts

Posted

In a landmark decision, an Australian widow has been granted legal permission to retrieve her late husband’s sperm.

The Supreme Court of Western Australia allowed the 62-year-old woman – whose identity remains confidential due to legal reasons – to remove the sperm from her husband, who died on Dec 17, 2023, ABC News reported.

He was 61, and his sperm has been preserved in a morgue in Perth.

The widow’s desire to conceive a child via a surrogate faced a significant legal hurdle, as the posthumous use of reproductive tissue is prohibited in Western Australia.

She will now have to seek approval from the Reproductive Technology Council to use the sperm in a jurisdiction where the procedure is legal.

The couple had previously endured the death of their two children – a 29-year-old daughter who drowned during a fishing trip in 2013, and a 30-year-old son who died in a car accident in 2019. The documents revealed that they had discussed having another child to rebuild their family.
 

Read More: https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/australianz/australian-widow-granted-rights-to-harvest-sperm-from-dead-husband

Posted

I feel bad for her. Only 62 but has already lost her husband and all her kids.

Posted

Gosh that's a really sad story but I don't think having another child is the healthiest response, especially since she'll probably only live until they're 20 at most. Fostering would probably be a much better option

  • Like 1
Posted

I thought this was about a spider :deadvision:

  • Haha 1
Posted

Get that D I guess. :bloo:

Posted

I don't get it, did they shag off the corpse or what? 

Posted

She's carrying a child at 62 with a dead guy's sperm?

 

 

  • Haha 1
Posted

Creep

Posted
15 minutes ago, Miracle said:

She's carrying a child at 62 with a dead guy's sperm?

 

 

yes :deadbanana4:

Posted
20 minutes ago, Miracle said:

She's carrying a child at 62 with a dead guy's sperm?

 

 

Quote

The widow’s desire to conceive a child via a surrogate faced a significant legal hurdle, as the posthumous use of reproductive tissue is prohibited in Western Australia.

 

Posted

I was like why would she have a child at 62 but she lost her two children. This poor woman. 

  • Like 1
Posted

That poor surrogate walking around with ghost semen in her belly 

Posted

What in the Wilhelmina Slater is this? :rip:

  • Haha 1
  • ATRL Moderator
Posted
1 hour ago, GraceRandolph said:

The couple had previously endured the death of their two children – a 29-year-old daughter who drowned during a fishing trip in 2013, and a 30-year-old son who died in a car accident in 2019.

Omg, how awful :shakeno:

Posted

the sperm was preserved already guys :dies: poor woman losing her husband and their two children so young.. but idk if that is the right decision, if sth happens with her, where will the child go? idk if they allow adoption in this age.. hopefully she finds some kind of solace.

Posted
19 minutes ago, Robert said:

What in the Wilhelmina Slater is this? :rip:

This was my first thought as well. :rip: 

Posted

Sucks she had to endure all those losses, but it’s very selfish and disgusting behavior to bring a child with a dead dad into this world at over 60 to abuse as a trauma dump. 

Posted

Sperm preserved in a morgue, surely that isn’t accurate? Do they mean a sperm clinic? 

Posted


 

Quote

 

He was 61, and his sperm has been preserved in a morgue in Perth. ..........

 

The woman is going to have to use donor eggs because she’s 62.....

 

and she’s also planning to use a surrogate... .....

 

 

 

what in the mary shelly's frankenstein :rip:

 

 

 

Posted

If women need permission from their husband to have an abortion, women should have the right to do what they want with their husband’s sperm 

  • Thanks 1
Posted

So basically the hospital failed her, wasted taxpayer resources, and she eventually achieved what was clearly something her and her husband had considered prior to his death.

 

I knew this would be either WA or NT.

Posted
On 1/8/2024 at 3:43 PM, glitch said:

Gosh that's a really sad story but I don't think having another child is the healthiest response, especially since she'll probably only live until they're 20 at most. Fostering would probably be a much better option

She probably wants to have a blood related heir/heiress 

Posted
On 1/8/2024 at 11:16 PM, Miracle said:

She's carrying a child at 62 with a dead guy's sperm?

...who isn't ?

Posted

Some of y'all are so illiterate :toofunny2:

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.