Astrue v. Capato: Fertility Preservation Implications in the Supreme Court
A few weeks ago we wrote a blog post on the upcoming Supreme Court case that addresses whether a child conceived after the death of a biological parent, such as one who underwent fertility preservation, is eligible for survivor benefits through the Social Security Administration. Though a handful of similar cases have popped up around the United States, the case in question refers to the twin children of Robert and Karen Capato. Robert Capato banked sperm prior to beginning esophageal cancer treatment shortly after his marriage to Karen in 1999. After his death, Karen used Robert’s banked sperm and gave birth to twins in 2003. For a better overview of the case, read our first blog.
Recently, the Merits Briefs for the Petitioner, Michael Astrue, the Commissioner of Social Security, and the Respondent, Karen Capato, were submitted to the Supreme Court, and are avaialable here:
Also,members provided information for one of the amicus (meaning “friend of the court”) briefs that were submitted. You can read that brief here:
The case will be argued on Monday, March 19th, 2012. We will keep you updated on the case as it progresses.
- Astrue v. Capato: The Supreme Court Covers Oncofertility
- Cancer, Fertility, and the Supreme Court
- Grand Rounds at the University of Illinois at Chicago: Legal and Ethical Implications of Fertility Preservation
- Ethical Implications of Investigational Fertility Preservation Research
- Cancer, Fertility and Environmental Implications