BRITAIN: A woman whose former partner refuses to allow her to implant the embryos they created before she had cancer treatment was yesterday dealt a blow by the European Court of Human Rights in her bid to become pregnant.
Natallie Evans (35) had her ovaries removed in October 2001 because of precancerous tumours, so her only chance of having a child genetically her own is through the frozen embryos.
However, her former partner, Howard Johnston, has withdrawn his permission for their use, saying that he does not want to father her child.
Under British fertility regulations, which she unsuccessfully fought in British courts, Ms Evans cannot have the embryos implanted without his consent.
The court in Strasbourg yesterday decided by five judges to two that Britain's Human Fertility and Embryology Act, 1990, which governs fertility treatment, does not breach Ms Evans's human rights.
However, in the light of the split decision, the court indicated she could make one further appeal to the grand chamber of the European court, which she said she would do.
Ms Evans said: "I had really hoped the Strasbourg decision would be an end to what I have gone through over the last four years. However, I am still as determined as ever to do everything possible to be allowed to try for a child of my own using my stored embryos."
She sent a plea to her former partner to change his mind. "I still think he is wrong. I just want him to reconsider and think about the implications. He is able to go on and have children genetically his own. I'm not," she said.
She did not understand when she signed the papers that the consent of both partners was necessary for her fertility treatment to go ahead.
Her solicitor, Muiris Lyons, said he thought they had a chance of being heard by the grand chamber, not least because of the strong dissenting views of two of the Strasbourg judges. "We say the 1990 act doesn't strike the right balance [ between the rights of the individuals]. There is a suggestion even from the majority [ judges] that the act could have struck a fairer balance," he said.
Gillian Lockwood, chairwoman of the British Fertility Society ethics subcommittee, said: "The decision to encourage Natallie to appeal to the grand chamber indicates the exceptional sympathy the judges in Strasbourg had for her plight."
British legislation was clear that the consent of both parties was required. If Ms Evans had had her eggs frozen without being fertilised, she would have had a chance of genetic motherhood without forcing Mr Johnston to become a parent.
Egg freezing is now carried out in only a few centres in Britain, however, and few babies have been born as a result.