Israel’s Central District Court has overturned a previous ruling in the ongoing legal battle over an IVF mix-up, determining that a two-year-old girl, born in 2022 due to an embryo transfer mistake at an Assuta fertility clinic, will stay with the parents who have been raising her rather than be placed with her biological parents.
This latest decision reverses the judgment issued by the Rishon Lezion Family Court in November 2024, which had ordered that the child, identified only as Sophia, be handed over to her genetic parents. Sophia has spent her entire life under the care of the woman who gave birth to her and that woman’s partner, who have nurtured and loved her since birth.
In issuing their verdict, the judges of the Central District Court highlighted the “great devotion” of the woman who carried Sophia and emphasized that, from an ethical standpoint, a child should not be removed from the custody of the woman who gave birth to her.
Despite ruling in favor of the birth mother, the court also determined that Sophia’s biological parents should maintain close contact with her and that she should be informed of the circumstances of her birth at an appropriate age.
The genetic parents still have the option to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court.
Since her birth in 2022, Sophia has been raised by the woman who carried her and that woman’s husband. The couple successfully secured a suspension of the lower court’s ruling earlier this year while their appeal was pending, ensuring that the child has never been separated from them.
The error at Assuta Medical Center in Rishon Lezion came to light when doctors discovered medical issues with the fetus, prompting genetic tests that revealed that neither the expectant mother nor her husband was biologically related to the unborn child.
In its November 2024 ruling, the Rishon Lezion Family Court sided with Sophia’s biological parents, stating that, according to expert testimony, they should be recognized as her “natural parents” and that “it was best for a child to be raised by them.” However, another expert opinion submitted to the court recommended that Sophia remain with her birth mother and her partner.
The three-judge panel of the Central District Court ultimately decided that the rights of the birth mother and her husband should take precedence over those of the genetic parents, explaining in their ruling that “we are dealing with a mother who conceived and carried the minor in her womb without knowing about the mistake that had occurred.”
The court further acknowledged the birth mother’s willingness to put herself at significant risk for the baby’s well-being. During her pregnancy, despite medical advice to terminate, she opted for a surgical procedure to address the fetus’s condition, placing her own life in danger.
“She gave birth to the girl, and together with her partner, she raised her with great devotion, devoting their time to [the child’s] health and physical and mental development,” the judges wrote.
They stressed the ethical principle that “just as one does not remove a fetus from the womb of the mother bearing [it], so too one does not remove the child from her hands.”
Nevertheless, in keeping with recommendations from professionals, the judges affirmed the importance of ensuring that Sophia is aware of her origins as she grows older. They also ruled that her genetic parents should have the opportunity for ongoing contact with her, “in accordance with arrangements to be determined by the welfare services.”
Attorney Galit Kerner, who represented the birth mother and her husband, welcomed the verdict, emphasizing that the court had confirmed “that it is not appropriate to separate a mother and father from their daughter, whom they gave birth to, and are raising with love.”
Sophia’s biological parents expressed deep disappointment with the ruling, stating that they were “shocked and pained” by the decision. They criticized the court’s stance, arguing that “not only are mistakes and injustices not corrected, but they are sanctioned and perpetuated under the cover of the state,” according to Ynet.
They maintained that Sophia’s long-term well-being would be best served by growing up “amid her biological family” and vowed to explore their legal options “to correct this injustice.”
A government investigation into the 2022 mix-up at Assuta Medical Center, released in March 2023, found that serious breaches of protocol, driven by excessive workload pressures, had led to the embryo being transferred to the wrong patient.
Amid ongoing legal proceedings, the couple raising Sophia filed a lawsuit against Assuta, seeking NIS 10 million ($2.8 million) in damages over the ordeal.
During the investigation, the Health Ministry took action against Assuta Medical Center, ordering in October 2022 that its fertility department reduce operations by half, cutting the number of annual fertilization treatments from 10,000 to 5,000.
Further scrutiny uncovered additional alarming errors in the fertility department at Assuta Medical Center’s Tel Aviv branch, leading the Health Ministry to prohibit the clinic from accepting any new patients.
{Matzav.com Israel}
Note that Halachically, the child is the daughter of the woman who carried her to term and gave birth to her, not of the woman who supplied the genetic material.
Please supply your sources for that. And if the child were a boy which “father” would determine its sheivet? Can she now marry a child born to the biological parent? Achilas terumah?
Don’t confuse father and mother.
For motherhood, all Poskim agree that the woman who carried the child and gave birth to him is the Halachic mother, as she is the one who nurtured the embryo to maturity.
You’re asking about fatherhood. Most current Poskim give that to the biological father (i.e. the originator of the genetic material). This is the current and common ruling accepted today. Thus the shevet would be that of the biological father.
There are, however, some opinions that claim that in any IVF situation the child is Halachically fatherless, since they say fatherhood requires an actual action on the part of the father, and not just genetic material.
According to A T.I.M.E, in Torah observant circles in the U.S., IVF treatment is supervised by a mashgiach temidi.
A TIME does not work with Donor Eggs because of identity/status issues
I asked when l was a 40 something single, being asked difficult questions before certain eligible men would date me.
A T.I.M.E. provides a mashgiach temidi for the IVF process.
They do not offer support for donor eggs because of the identity issues that can result.
As an older single, l was subject to pressure from eligible men, and l had to ask these painful shailos, in order to go on a date.