Husband’s council wants AG’s view rejected

A “DRAMATIC” view has been taken by the Attorney General that documents signed four years ago by the estranged husband of a woman consenting to fertility treatment for his wife mean there can be a subsequent implantation in his wife of any resulting embryos without any new consent from the husband, the High Court was told yesterday.

The AG is effectively saying the husband can never withdraw that “bare consent” given in 2002 “no matter what,” irrespective of the couple’s separation and the husband’s wish to have no more children with his wife, Mr John Rogers SC, for the 44-year-old husband, a father-of-two, said.

This was a “dramatic” position for the AG to take and it should be rejected by the court on public policy and other grounds, including because the consent documents did not clearly identify the circumstances under which a person could be forced to become a father, he urged.