Woman expects husband to maintain any children

Wife's evidence: A woman has told the High Court she expects her estranged husband to financially maintain and assume full responsibility for any children who may be born if she wins a legal challenge to her husband's refusal to consent to the implantation in her of three embryos.

The embryos were frozen following fertility treatment undertaken by the couple four years ago.

She held that view irrespective of her husband's view that he did not want any more children and irrespective of his circumstances, the woman said.

"My husband is the legal father of the frozen embryos and he has a duty as a father to care for our children," she said. "He signed a contract to say he will take full responsibility for whatever outcome of our IVF treatment."

The mother of two (41) was concluding her evidence yesterday in her legal action aimed at procuring the implantation of the embryos in her uterus.

Cross-examined by John Rogers SC, for the man, who became legally separated from his wife in July last year, she agreed that if she became pregnant with twins following implantation, she would probably be unable to work for a period. Asked would her husband be responsible for the consequent costs, she said: "Yes, he is their father."

Asked about various documents in her medical file from the Sims fertility clinic in Rathgar, the woman said she had not seen the file until yesterday.

She agreed that a document appeared to indicate that eight embryos had been produced following her IVF treatment.

She said she and her husband were told they had six healthy embryos of which three were to be inserted into her in February 2001 with the remaining three to be frozen. It seemed from the document the other two did not survive, she said.

She agreed that in the normal course where an ovum was fertilised following intercourse, that many embryos were lost naturally and normally.

"That's mother nature," she said and it did not affect her view of an embryo being human life. "These three embryos are our children, that's my belief," she said. "That's how our daughter came into the world, by using the technique of IVF."

She said the issue of responsibility for costs of any children resulting from implantation was left outstanding in family law proceedings between herself and her husband.

She saw no difficulty with the fact that, if a child or children were born following implantation, this would create a different family unit than the existing one involving herself, her husband and their two children.

Mr Rogers said the woman and her husband would be entitled to apply for divorce next year and that could mean they would be divorced before any child perhaps being born should her action prove successful.

The woman said that depended on the legal action.