This is a fascinating case in front of the Supreme Court right now. Are children conceived via IVF after the death of the father entitled to survivor’s benefits? Women’s Health Policy Report:
The Supreme Court on Monday heard oral arguments in a case that will decide whether children conceived through in vitro fertilization after a parent’s death can receive Social Security benefits, NPR’s “All Things Considered” reports (Totenberg, “All Things Considered,” NPR, 3/19).
The Social Security Administration since 1939 has provided a benefit to the families of deceased wage earners. However, it is unclear whether benefits should be provided to children who were not yet conceived when the wage earner died.
This is something that nobody could’ve seen coming in 1939.
One good thing is that the Supreme Court is hearing arguments about when a child is “conceived” and not when the child is born. Kinda’ interesting, isn’t it? It’s almost like they’re admitting conception is when life begins. Or something.
March 21, 2012 at 1:53 am
This case is one to watch. It will have far reaching effects. If the Court does rule the children do deserve benefits, does that mean we tax payers can regulate the fertility industry and prohibit posthumous conception? Will that lead to broader regulations?
We shall see…
March 21, 2012 at 1:25 pm
Just another of many examples of why IVF is evil – and ought to be banned by any moral society.
March 21, 2012 at 8:13 pm
I think you're reading too much into the life begins at conception angle. I think it's already established that children in utero when a father dies are considered his offspring and deserving of receiving survivor benefits. This case is not seeking benefits for the unborn, but upon the birth of those conceived after his death through artificial means. I wonder how they would handle the case of children conceived while the father was in a coma?
March 22, 2012 at 4:56 am
As long as he was alive ten years prior to his demise, he qualifies.
Death does not disqualify a recipient; it qualifies them.
If the Parent was alive after the time of his Death, the Feds would not even consider issuing Benefits.
Why is this an issue?
*