Wednesday, May 21, 2014
Jennifer Foor (University of Hawai’i Law Review) published an article entitled, Beeler v. Astrue: Addressing the Claims of Posthumously Conceived Children to Survivor Benefits, 34 U. Haw. L. Rev. 309-327 (2012). Provided below is an excerpt from the introduction:
Innovations in reproductive technology provide couples facing infertility or terminal illness with previously unimagined possibilities for family planning. "[A]ssisted reproductive technologies enable conception to take place even after the provider of the gamete has died. Gametes can be harvested and cryopreserved . . . prior to the provider's death or retrieved from him post-mortem, and then used . . . to impregnate a woman with genetic material . . . whose providers are no longer alive." 1 These medical developments have made it possible for a child to be conceived after the death of a parent with few regulatory obstacles. 2 Many couples are choosing to cryogenically preserve gametes in anticipation of infertility caused by medical treatments, 3 or death from disease or war. 4 While preserving reproductive material for conception at a later time is no longer on the cutting edge of medical development, the legal consequences of posthumous conception continue to work their way through the courts, and federal legislators have yet to address the resulting issues head-on. 5
A number of cases springing from the birth of posthumously conceived children have risen to the federal courts of appeal. These cases result from disputes over a posthumously conceived child's rights to Social Security survivor's benefits. In the absence of applicable regulation, this collision between technology and law has led to circuit splits and at least one case pending review by the United States Supreme Court. 6
Beeler v. Astrue 7 is one such case rooted ...