Kerala High Court Allows Preservation of Brain-Dead Husband’s Sperm for Future Reproduction

The Kerala High Court, in a significant interim order, allowed a woman to preserve the sperm of her brain-dead husband for future assisted reproduction. The case raises important questions under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act, 2021, particularly regarding consent requirements in extraordinary medical situations.

Justice MB Snehalatha passed the order while hearing a plea filed by the wife of a man currently on ventilator support at Baby Memorial Hospital, Kozhikode. The Court directed the hospital to permit extraction and cryopreservation of the husband’s gametes through a recognised ART clinic.

The Court, however, imposed a clear limitation on the scope of the order. It stated that only extraction and preservation of gametes would be permitted at this stage. Any further steps under the ART framework would require prior approval of the Court.

“Interim relief is granted directing the 5th respondent-hospital to allow the extraction and cryopreservation of the gametes of YYY (husband) by allowing the services of the 6th respondent or other recognized ART clinics. It is also made clear that, other than the extraction and preservation of the gametes, no further procedure under the Assisted Reproductive Technology (Regulation) Act shall be carried out without the permission of this Court,” the Court ordered.

The petitioner informed the Court that her husband had been admitted after suffering from cerebral venous thrombosis, which developed following a severe case of chickenpox. His condition deteriorated, eventually leading to brain death, and he has since been maintained on life support.

In light of these circumstances, the wife expressed her wish to preserve his gametes to enable future assisted reproductive treatment. She emphasised that the opportunity was time-sensitive and any delay could result in permanent loss of the possibility.

A key legal issue in the case arises from Section 22 of the ART Act, which mandates written informed consent from the individual whose gametes are to be used. The petitioner argued that obtaining such consent was impossible due to her husband’s medical condition.

The Court took note of this practical difficulty and the urgency involved. Recognising the potential irreparable harm that delay could cause, it granted interim relief, balancing the statutory requirements with the unique facts of the case.

The matter has been listed for further hearing on April 7, where broader legal questions surrounding consent, reproductive rights, and medical ethics are expected to be examined in detail.