Mary Sue Davis Case Summary

I. FACTS OF THE CASE Mary Sue Davis and Junior Davis tried to have children multiple times, but having a normal pregnancy was close to impossible. Mary Sue had five tubal pregnancies, before deciding to try vitro fertilization, which is a procedure that collects mature eggs from the ovaries and fertilizes them within a laboratory. Mary Sue was able to produce nine eggs that were quickly fertilized with Junior Davis’s sperm. The couple decided to implant two of the fertilized eggs and freeze the other eggs for future use. Nevertheless, the pregnancy failed once again, and the couple later decided to get a divorce. In spite of this, Mary Sue claimed the frozen eggs as her own, and made the decision to implant them in her womb. Her ex-husband, however, was not fond of this idea, and took Mary Sue to court.
Judge W. Dale Young deemed that human life starts at the moment of conception, and that the frozen eggs were “persons”. Thus, the judge granted Mary Sue custody of the eggs, and allowed her to do as she pleased. Furthermore, the judge also decided that Junior Davis …show more content…
According to “Schoenig’s Ethics Materials,” by Dr. Richard Schoenig, the Principle of Respect of Legitimate Property states that “we must not take or damage the legitimate property of others” (Schoenig, 57). Although Mary Sue was partial owner of the fertilized eggs, Junior Davis had as much right to the eggs as Mary Sue did. However, Mary Sue claimed the eggs as her own, and did not give Junior Davis his due. According to the Principle of Fairness, we must give others their fair due, which includes being honest, playing by the rules, keeping promises, etc. (Schoenig, 56). Mary Sue did not give Junior Davis his fair share in the matter, and broke two major principles of the

Show More

Related Documents: Mary Sue Davis Case Summary

Managing Information Technology (7th Edition) Essay