In Vitro Fertilization Legislation in the Tennessee General Assembly: Protecting the Rights of Parents

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.

By Rodney Stanley and Cara Robinson
February 28, 2025

During the 2024 legislative session in Tennessee, two democratic representatives introduced legislation in both the house and senate to protect the rights of families opting for in vitro fertilization (IVF) to start a family. HB 2227 and Senate Bill 1918 were introduced to prevent what happened in Alabama regarding in vitro fertilization from happening in Tennessee. In the case of Alabama, the ruling from the Alabama State Supreme Court stated that “extrauterine children” (children who were “unborn” outside the biological uterus), were covered under Alabama’s wrongful death law. The court’s ruling was based on the wrongful death statute and the additions to the Alabama State Constitution in 2018 protecting the rights of unborn children (Associated Press, 2023). This ruling lead to a temporary shut down of the IVF industry in Alabama that sent shock waves throughout the country, while leaving families who were in the process of going through the IVF process in Alabama devastated that their planning and saving money for the process was all for nothing. Thankfully, the Alabama General Assembly responded by passing legislation that shielded providers from prosecution and lawsuits if something might happen to an embryo while the process of IVF was occurring. The bill passed with broad bipartisan support in both chambers in Alabama. However, in Tennessee, the bill was stopped in both subcommittees and did not even make it to the floor for a vote. What was the difference between two deeply red states in passing similar bills protecting IVF and parents pursuing this path to start a family?

HB 2227 and Senate Bill 1918 would have exempted the use of contraceptives and “the disposal of embryos resulting from fertility treatments, including healthcare services, procedures, testing, medications, treatments, or products” from Tennessee’s statute on abortion. In addition, both bills included language that specifies the disposing of embryos resulting from fertility treatments as not associated with abortion care. The bills also included language that any type of device or product used to prevent pregnancy is also not considered abortion care. The reason for this type of language being added to each bill was because in Tennessee, individuals in Tennessee who provide abortion treats can be charged with a Class C felony. The only exclusions are cases involving molar or ectopic pregnancies where the unborn child is not expected to live, or the mother’s life is in danger.

Both bills faced immense opposition once they were introduced in the subcommittees. Many of the Republicans argued that the bill is not needed because there are currently no state laws forbidding IVF treatment or birth control. The Republicans feel that current IVF procedures and protections for birth control are protected by an interpretation of current abortion law from Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, that applies only to embryo after it has been transferred to a uterus and that the law does not apply to discarded or unused embryos. As a result of this ruling, the Republicans in the Tennessee General Assembly voted down the bill in both committees.

In recent conversations with both Representative Harold Love Jr. and Senator Raumesh Akbari (the sponsors of both bills), the plan is to reintroduce both bills in the 2025 General Assembly that begins in just a few days. However, the passage of these bills continues to be highly unlikely due to the continued view that IVF somehow violates the sanctity of life. In June of 2024, the Southern Baptist Convention voted to approve a resolution opposing the use of in vitro fertilization IVF and encouraged their parishioners not to seek this form of treatment to start a family. Their opposition is based on the disposal of unused and discarded embryo.  In addition, the Catholic Church has taken a stance against IVF treatment as well by indicating that it is a violation of the marriage act between a man and a woman.

With the Republicans holding a super majority in both the Tennessee House and Senate, and from prominent religious denominations taking a stance against IVF, it seems unlikely that long needed protections for IVF treatment are going to emerge anytime soon from Tennessee’s General Assembly. Tennessee needs comprehensive legislation codifying IVF treatment and it should guarantee that: healthcare providers should be given protections again prosecution if something might go wrong in the process. Parents’ rights need to guarantee that if they start the IVF process, they will be allowed to finish the cycle. Guaranteed protections for families using IVF treatment are needed in Tennessee.

---

Author: Rodney Stanley, Ph.D. is Interim Dean at Tennessee State University, College of Public Service

Author: Cara Robinson Ph.D. is Department Chair for Tennessee State University, Department of Social Work and Urban Studies

(No Ratings Yet)
Loading...