This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2018/jun/20/queensland-woman-allowed-to-use-dead-boyfriends-sperm
The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Australian woman wins right to use dead boyfriend's sperm | Australian woman wins right to use dead boyfriend's sperm |
(35 minutes later) | |
A Queensland woman has won the right to use her dead boyfriend’s sperm to have children, a court has ruled. | A Queensland woman has won the right to use her dead boyfriend’s sperm to have children, a court has ruled. |
Ayla Cresswell should be able to use Joshua Davies’ reproductive tissue, the Queensland supreme court justice Susan Brown said in Brisbane on Wednesday. | Ayla Cresswell should be able to use Joshua Davies’ reproductive tissue, the Queensland supreme court justice Susan Brown said in Brisbane on Wednesday. |
However, it was up to the particular medical clinic to decide if it was satisfied to go ahead with the procedure. Brown also ruled Cresswell was the only person entitled to use the sperm. | However, it was up to the particular medical clinic to decide if it was satisfied to go ahead with the procedure. Brown also ruled Cresswell was the only person entitled to use the sperm. |
The young woman had been in a relationship with Davies for about three years when he killed himself in August 2016. | The young woman had been in a relationship with Davies for about three years when he killed himself in August 2016. |
The pair were planning to get married and have children. | The pair were planning to get married and have children. |
After his death, and with the support of Davies’ family, Cresswell sought an urgent court order to remove his sperm. She has been paying for its storage ever since while she waited for Wednesday’s ruling. | |
Brown agreed with submissions made on behalf of Cresswell that the way in which the sperm was removed meant it was capable of being classed as property. | |
She also said she was satisfied the doctors who removed Davies’ reproductive tissue did so on behalf of Cresswell and that as a result she was entitled to possess it. | |
Cresswell did not comment outside court but her barrister, Kathryn McMillan QC, said her client was relieved. | |
Queensland | Queensland |
news | news |
Share on Facebook | Share on Facebook |
Share on Twitter | Share on Twitter |
Share via Email | Share via Email |
Share on LinkedIn | Share on LinkedIn |
Share on Pinterest | Share on Pinterest |
Share on Google+ | Share on Google+ |
Share on WhatsApp | Share on WhatsApp |
Share on Messenger | Share on Messenger |
Reuse this content | Reuse this content |