The case concerns a couple who, following a successful IVF treatment, had their remaining embryos frozen. Following the sudden death of the male donor, the female donor requests that the frozen embryos be transferred to another centre that can assist her with post-mortem IVF, as the original centre does not offer this treatment. However, she is informed that this is not possible due to Section 7 of the Embryo Act.

The clinic maintains that, following the death of one of the donors, the remaining embryos must be destroyed, unless both donors have given prior written consent for the storage and use of the embryos. However, the court ruled that the centre had not sufficiently informed the couple about this rule, meaning that it must nevertheless hand over the frozen embryos to the woman.

Following the judge’s decision, Ploem and her colleague Merel Spaander (LCHL) wrote an article for the Tijdschrift voor Gezondheidsrecht on the broader topic of post-mortem reproduction. They conclude that sometimes, as in this case where a significant interest of the woman is at stake, one must act not according to the letter but the spirit of the law. They also point out that institutions must make an effort to provide their donors with accurate and comprehensive information and to make them aware of their rights.